Gen. Colin Powell Endorses Obama in October Surprise

Talk about an "October Surprise"! It seems these days that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) just can't get enough good news at times when he needs it the most. Certainly, the McCain campaign has been trying to dominate news with charges of ACORN voter fraud, Bill Ayers accusations, and the dreaded robocall campaign in an effort to "change the subject" from the economy to whether Obama is a risky choice. This weekend, the Obama campaign gained three important pieces of good news in that a crowd of 100,000 attended Obama's St. Louis, MO rally on Saturday, Obama reported raising $150M during September from 630,000 new donors (out of a total 3.1M donors of which the most prolific givers were retirees and college students), and the biggest catch was Gen. Colin Powell endorsing Obama for President on Sunday's Meet the Press on NBC.

Without a doubt, this endorsement is Obama's biggest to date, even bigger than John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Christopher Buckley combined. No matter his faults during the Bush administration, 4-star Gen. Colin Powell still holds a significant role in American politics with Democrats and Republicans alike having served as Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff under George H. W. Bush, and National Security Adviser and Secretary of State under George W. Bush. This endorsement speaks to Obama's ability to unite people from polar opposites of the political spectrum as well adding to his foreign policy knowledge and negates the "experience" argument oft cited against Obama by conservatives.

Some excerpts from Gen. Powell's interview with moderator Tom Brokaw:

MR. BROKAW: If you were called into the Oval Office on January 21st by the new president, whoever it happens to be, and he said to you, "General Powell, I need from you your recommendation on where I begin. What should be my priorities?" Where would you start?

GEN. POWELL: I would start with talking to the American people and talking to the world, and conveying a new image of American leadership, a new image of America's role in the world.

GEN. POWELL: I think the American people and the gentlemen running for president will have to, early on, focus on education more than we have seen in the campaign so far. America has a terrible educational problem in the sense that we have too many youngsters not finishing school. A third of our kids don't finish high school, 50 percent of minorities don't finish high school. We've got to work on this, and my, my wife and I are leading a campaign with this purpose.

Also, I think, the new president has to realize that the world looks to America for leadership, and so we have to show leadership on some issues that the world is expecting us to, whether it's energy, global warming and the environment. And I think we have to do a lot more with respect to poverty alleviation and helping the needy people of the world. We need to increase the amount of resources we put into our development programs to help the rest of the world. Because when you help the poorest in the world, you start to move them up an economic and social ladder, and they're not going to be moving toward violence or terrorism of the kind that we worry about.

MR. BROKAW: General Powell, actually you gave a campaign contribution to Senator McCain. You have met twice at least with Barack Obama. Are you prepared to make a public declaration of which of these two candidates that you're prepared to support?

GEN. POWELL: Yes, but let me lead into it this way. I know both of these individuals very well now. I've known John for 25 years as your setup said. And I've gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years. Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country. Either one of them, I think, would be a good president. I have said to Mr. McCain that I admire all he has done. I have some concerns about the direction that the party has taken in recent years. It has moved more to the right than I would like to see it, but that's a choice the party makes. And I've said to Mr. Obama, "You have to pass a test of do you have enough experience, and do you bring the judgment to the table that would give us confidence that you would be a good president."

And I've watched him over the past two years, frankly, and I've had this conversation
with him. I have especially watched over the last six of seven weeks as both of them have really taken a final exam with respect to this economic crisis that we are in and coming out of the conventions. And I must say that I've gotten a good measure of both. In the case of Mr. McCain, I found that he was a little unsure as to deal with the economic problems that we were having and almost every day there was a different approach to the problem. And that concerned me, sensing that he didn't have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had. And I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She's a very distinguished woman, and she's to be admired; but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which
is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.

On the Obama side, I watched Mr. Obama and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one. And also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a, a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well. I also believe that on the Republican side over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower. Mr. Obama, at the same time, has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He's crossing lines--ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He's thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.

And I've also been disappointed, frankly, by some of the approaches that Senator McCain has taken recently, or his campaign ads, on issues that are not really central to the problems that the American people are worried about. This Bill Ayers situation that's been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he's a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him? And why do we have these robocalls going on around the country trying to suggest that, because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow, Mr. Obama is tainted. What they're trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings. And I think that's inappropriate.

Now, I understand what politics is all about. I know how you can go after one another, and that's good. But I think this goes too far. And I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It's not what the American people are looking for. And I look at these kinds of approaches to the campaign and they trouble me. And the party has moved even further to the right, and Governor Palin has indicated a further rightward shift. I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that's what we'd be looking at in a McCain administration. I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards--Purple Heart, Bronze Star--showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way. And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know. But I'm troubled
about the fact that, within the party, we have these kinds of expressions.

So, when I look at all of this and I think back to my Army career, we've got two individuals, either one of them could be a good president. But which is the president that we need now? Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time? And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire,
because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities--and we have to take that into account--as well as his substance--he has both style and substance--he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world--onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Senator Barack
Obama.

MR. BROKAW: And you are fully aware that there will be some--how many, no one can say for sure--but there will be some who will say this is an African-American, distinguished American, supporting another African-American because of race.

GEN. POWELL: If I had only had that in mind, I could have done this six, eight, 10 months ago. I really have been going back and forth between somebody I have the highest respect and regard for, John McCain, and somebody I was getting to know, Barack Obama. And it was only in the last couple of months that I settled on this. And I can't deny that it will be a historic event for an African-American to become president. And should that happen, all Americans should be proud--not just African-Americans, but all Americans--that we have reached this point in our national history where such a thing could happen. It will also not only electrify our country, I think it'll electrify the world.

McCain-Obama III: The Professor TKO's Grumpy McNasty

OBAMA 3-FOR-3 IN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES:

Thank God for a much better debate than last week's! This was partly because other than the tax bracket and health care plan cost questions, we really didn't hear too many repeat questions like we did in the first two debates. Earlier this week, McCain promised he would "take it to Obama" and "whoop his you-know-what" in response to Obama's stating that McCain was afraid to bring up Ayers and other controversial subjects to his face. Of course, that's pretty much the same thing McCain said prior to the 2nd Presidential Debate in which he again managed to look old and out-of-place next to a Presidential, charismatic Obama. Anyway, for all the false bravado, it didn't happen for McCain. No matter how many times McCain attacked Obama in the debate format which featured both candidates seated around a table, Obama parried each attack with facts while McCain made generalizations. Obama was as calm as always while McCain seemed to have the attitude of someone who doesn't think his opponent is worthy to share the stage with him. This final debate was held at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY and moderated by Bob Schieffer of CBS News with with the Jr. Senator from NY and former Presidential aspirant, Hillary Clinton in attendance along with Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Caroline Kennedy, Michelle Obama, Cindy McCain & Governor Mitt Romney in attendance.

At this point though, whether called out by Obama or not, McCain had no way to rescue his flagging numbers and improve the election outlook unless he won the third Presidential Debate of 2008 by a convincing margin. Having lost the debate by his greatest margin to date, he must find some other way to close the polling gap with Obama who currently has a 10-14-point advantage over McCain. Of course, there is always the possibility of an "October Surprise" by the Republican party. Having rehashed all of Hillary Clinton's primary attacks (Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright/Father Pfleger, the 3AM call, the in-experience factor, etc.) to none effect, at this point the only thing McCain can hope for is either a terrorist attack or the Republican election machine discounting or mis-counting millions of new Democratic votes on election day.

OUTTAKES & IMPRESSIONS:

The major reaction groups (surveying partisan and independent viewers of the debate) say that Obama again won the debate by even larger margins than he won the Second Presidential Debate (NBC: 65-29% as of 10:00am, 10/16/08 (41,033 polled), SurveyUSA: 56-28, Fox News: 82-18% as of 10:00am, 10/16/08 (373,943 polled), CNN: 58-31, CBS: 53-22).

CNN also ran a number of polling questions to viewers of the debate. Obama won on all measures, and debate watchers believed Obama would do a better job handling the economy by 59-24%.

Both candidates were given the opportunity to talk about their running mates as reflections of the kind of people they would bring into the government and to address whether the opposing VP candidate has Presidential qualifications. McCain took the opportunity to build up Palin but also to attack Biden. Not once did Obama attack Palin during the debate but instead praised her work with special needs children.

I was glad that Obama took the time to lay out exactly who Bill Ayers is and the fact that Ayers has never been associated with the Obama campaign. Obama also smartly noted that other members of the non-profit Annenberg Foundation board they both served on including Presidents of major research universities and Republicans including President Ronald Reagan's former Ambassador, the founder, Walter Annenberg and his wife also worked for Reagan. However, Obama didn't address McCain's other primary accusation which was about ACORN, the community organizing and voter registration organization whom McCain claimed Obama's campaign gave over $800,000 and is now engaging in alleged voter fraud. Not everyone knows the facts about the organization and their current legal issues, and voters tend to believe whatever they see and hear on TV. So I think that was a missed opportunity.

If you were wondering who the heck Joe (Wurzelbacher) the Plumber is, and whether he exists, worry no more. The LA Times Top of the Ticket Blog has posted his picture as well as the Huffington Post. I'm guessing he's a bachelor from the LAT pic, but in either case he was on CNN this morning saying that he's doesn't like Obama's tax reform punishing him if he buys a business like he plans to and it makes more than $250,000 annually. I've got news for you, Joe. If you can afford to buy or start your own business AND it's going to make you more than $250,000, you're doing much better than the average American right now.


Check out CNN's Election Center for debate video, transcript, highlights & discussion.

While other CNN analysts made a point of saying that Obama didn't seem passionate enough and was more "professorial" than necessary, David Gergen, a Presidential adviser, referred to McCain as "Grumpy McNasty" for the angry or frowning faces and eye-rolls he made whenever Obama was speaking. At least McCain looked at Obama while speaking to him this time. McCain's disdain for Obama was still evident in his very obvious facial expressions.

I want to know why McCain is always writing on the large yellow legal pad. What does he write? Both my wife and I were wondering this. After all, since McCain has been a Congressman for 26 years, why does he need to write debate notes when he already knows everything because, "Senator Obama doesn't understand"?

The funniest line of the night goes to McCain who at one point, called Obama, "Senator Government" then corrected himself.

What would the debate be without some sarcasm from McCain who pointed out a couple times he "admires Senator Obama's eloquence".

It seemed that Schieffer gave McCain the last word more often than he did to Obama.

QUOTABLES:

Obama: "Well, look, you know, I think that we expect presidential campaigns to be tough. ...two-thirds of the American people think that Senator McCain is running a negative campaign versus one-third of mine. And 100 percent, John, of your ads...have been negative."

Obama: "The fact that this [Bill Ayers] has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me."

McCain: "Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago."

Obama: "If I've occasionally mistaken your policies for George Bush's policies, it's because on the core economic issues that matter to the American people -- on tax policy, on energy policy, on spending priorities -- you have been a vigorous supporter of President Bush."

Obama: "Your running mate didn't ... stop (it), didn't say 'hold on a second, that's kind of out of line.' (on Palin rally attendees shouting, "Kill him," and "Terrorist")

McCain: "I admire so much Sen. Obama's eloquence. And you really have to pay attention to words. He said, we will 'look at' offshore drilling. Did you get that? 'Look at.'"

IMAGES FROM THE DEBATE:
(Courtesy Huffington Post)

Voter Suppression, the GOP's Not-So-Secret Weapon (Part 2)

In a follow-up to my last blog post on Republican voter fraud leading up to the 2008 elections, I'm including in this post the following recent news briefs on the subject:

Purging the Poor

In what may be a new low, earlier this week a Republican Party county chairman in Michigan told The Michigan Messenger, our sister site, that the party plans to use lists of foreclosed homes to challenge the ballots of people registered at those addresses who try to vote on Election Day. Though he’s since denied he said it, reporter Eartha Jane Melzer stands by her story.

GOP Loses Challenge to Early Ohio Voting

Ohio voters went to the polls yesterday for the first day of early voting, exercising a right in Ohio that the state’s Republicans had fought hard to defeat.

Because of an overlap between the beginning of absentee voting 35 days before Election Day, which started yesterday, and the Oct. 6 end of voter registration, Ohio allows one week of same-day voting and registration.

Republicans had fought hard against that rule, designed to make voting easier, by bringing several lawsuits, charging that early votes and same-day registration lend themselves to attempts at voter fraud. These are just some of several GOP lawsuits to end related attempts to challenge Democratic votes in key swing states.

In general, Republican lawsuits around the country have been urging states to restrict voting rights — claiming the threat of massive voter fraud.

Democrats respond that Republicans are just trying to prevent voting by the poor, young, elderly and minorities. All these demographics are more likely to vote Democrat, and are the target of major Democratic Party get-out-the-vote efforts.

Dem Registration Surges in Nevada

Democratic voter registration is surging across Nevada — including swing counties where Republicans once held an edge.

Since 2006, Democrats have beat Republicans in new registrants by about 13,000 Nevadans. That’s a big shift for a swing state typically decided by narrow margins — for example, Nevada re-elected Bush by a slim 21,000 votes.

New Wiki Counters GOP Voter Suppresion

Can Wikipedia help vanquish voter suppression in America?

That’s the model some activists are betting on.

Democrats have been moving swiftly to fight Republican voter suppression tactics in Michigan. Since first reported by our sister site, The Michigan Messenger, a GOP effort to suppress voters based on home foreclosures has drawn a

lawsuit from the Obama campaign; calls for a Justice Dept. investigation, from Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and demands from grass-roots activists that Sen. John McCain condemn these practices.

(So far, McCain’s “honest and open election committee” did not even make a pretense of returning calls about the issue.)

Now bloggers and techies are developing a dedicated Voter Suppression Wiki — a centralized, open source online portal — to help track, expose and prevent voter suppression this cycle.

The wiki tracks incidents of voter suppression, and enables citizens to upload alleged examples of suppression. An “action center” links visitors to a range of local and national programs working to combat suppression. Jon Pincus, a social networking activist whom I met while working against warrantless spying, argues that Web activism is helpful here because most suppression turns on information gaps.

ACORN Office in Vegas Raided in Voter-Fraud Probe

Nevada authorities seized records Tuesday from a group they accused of submitting fraudulent voter-registration forms — including for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is being accused of voter registration fraud. The group is based in Las Vegas and aims to register low-income people to vote. Nevada officials say that ACORN used fake and duplicate names, including the names of Dallas Cowboy players in a fraudulent voter registration.

(ABC News Photo Illustration)

"Tony Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada, and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won't be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4," said Secretary of State Ross Miller, referring to star players on the pro football team.

State authorities raided the headquarters of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a group that works to register low-income people.

Miller said the raid was part of a monthslong investigation, and he contended the group had submitted registration forms that used false information or duplicated information on multiple forms. He did not estimate how many.

Bertha Lewis, interim chief organizer for ACORN, said the group has been working with election officials to weed out fraudulent forms from those submitted by the canvassers it hires.

"Today's raid by the secretary of state's office is a stunt that serves no useful purpose other than to discredit our work registering Nevadans," Lewis said.

"For the past 10 months, anytime ACORN has identified a potentially fraudulent application, we turn that application in to election officials separately and offer to provide election officials with the information they would need to pursue an investigation or prosecution of the individual," Lewis said.

She said ACORN had turned in 46 problem applications submitted by 33 former employees to election officials in the Las Vegas area, where it has registered 80,000 people.

According to its national Web site, the group has registered 1.3 million people nationwide for the Nov. 4 election. It has encountered complaints of fraud stemming from registration efforts in Wisconsin, North Carolina, New Mexico, Michigan, Ohio and Missouri.

Why the Debates Won't Matter (Hint: It's a Felony)

This election won't be won or lost at the debates. Nor will it be determined by the two campaigns' "ground games" -- their get-out-the-vote efforts. Nor, unfortunately, will its outcome even depend on how many Americans wake up on Election Day intending to vote for one candidate or the other.

Instead, my fear is that the Electoral College results will hang on the swing state voting systems' vulnerability to sabotage.

It's already happening.

In El Paso County, Colorado, the county clerk -- a delegate to the Republican National Convention -- told out-of-state undergraduates at Colorado College, falsely, that they couldn't vote in Colorado if their parents claim them as dependents on their taxes.

In Montgomery County, Virginia, the county registrar issued a press release warning out-of-state college students, falsely, that if they register to vote in Virginia, they won't be eligible for coverage under their parents' health and car insurance, and that "if you have a scholarship attached to your former residence, you could lose this funding."

In Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin, Democratic voters received a mailing containing tear-out requests for absentee ballots addressed to the clerk in Caledonia -- the wrong location. In Middleton, Wisconsin, Democratic voters received absentee ballot requests addressed to the clerk in Madison -- the wrong address. Both mailers were sent by the McCain campaign.

Florida, Michigan and Ohio have some of the country's highest foreclosure rates. "Because many homeowners in foreclosure are black or poor," says the New York Times, "and are considered probable Democratic voters in many areas, the issue has begun to have political ramifications." If you're one of the million Americans who lost a home through foreclosure, and if you didn't file a change of address with your election board, you're a sitting duck for an Election Day challenge by a partisan poll watcher holding a public list of foreclosed homes. In states like New Mexico and Iowa, the number of foreclosures is greater than the number of votes by which George W. Bush carried the state in 2004.

Democrats cry foul over suspicious e-mail

An e-mail circulating throughout Texas and apparently targeting supporters of Democrat Barack Obama falsely warns voters that casting a straight-ticket Democratic ballot won't register a vote for Obama.

Democratic leaders are crying foul. First, it's not true, they say.

Second, they think it could cause people using the eSlate electronic voting machines to inadvertently cancel out their downballot straight-ticket voters, eliminating potentially millions of votes for Democratic candidates in state and county races.

"For those who normally vote 'Straight Democratic', please pay close attention!!!!!" states the e-mail, obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

"I was informed this weekend by a group of Obama volunteers that when voting for the presidential candidate this November, you have to make sure you punch Barack's name first, then proceed to punch 'Straight Democratic' or else the vote for the president won't count," the e-mail says.

Quite the opposite, says Texas Democratic Party spokesman Hector Nieto said.

Voter Suppression, the GOP's Not-So-Secret Weapon

More disturbing news that should make all lovers of freedom and equal voting rights sick has been reported by several news sources. The Washington Independent published an eye-opening article on the recent spate of voter registration laws being challenged by the Republican party on a state-by-state basis. It is entirely possible that we could be seeing a national replay of Florida 2000 all over again, unless either these challenges are stopped in the courts or the newly registered Democratic voters, independents, and youth voters come out and vote in record numbers for the Democratic Presidential ticket on November 4, 2008. These three groups of voters tend not to vote in numbers comparable to long-time voters because they are not in the habit of voting and may forget to vote or think that their "one" vote won't make much difference in the outcome of an election.

As my Pastor, Bishop Matthew Williams says about people's character, "A man will do what he has always done," meaning a person's character will cause him to do those things that he is accustomed to doing or in the habit of doing. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the GOP--after successfully rigging the vote nationally by manipulating Diebold voting machines whose owner publicly committed to delivering Ohio to Bush in 2000 and conducting successful voter's challenges in 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections--would seek to gain advantage by doing the same thing again! It doesn't help that recently ACORN offices in Las Vegas were raided in a supposed voter registration fraud sting. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a popular national community organizing group was targeted because of allegations of submitting nearly 300 inaccurate voter registration cards in their voter registration effort. I believe this organization was purposely targeted because in this election cycle, the Obama campaign is said to have collaborated with ACORN to assist in it's Get Out the Vote efforts due to ACORN's reputation for helping register and turn out new voters. Also, new Democratic voter registration in Nevada has risen by record numbers this year, threatening to turn the state blue in November. See the connection? Republicans conveniently forget that John McCain was a 2006 keynote speaker at an immigration reform rally sponsored by ACORN, and that the organization enjoys bi-partisan support around the country. McCain has turned on the organization now that it is politically expedient.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) seated with Congressman Kendrick Meeks (D-FL) at February 2006 ACORN Rally

One thing worth noting... voter fraud is only voter fraud if a person actually votes fraudulently! Since it is difficult to physically vote if one's name and address are not on the voter rolls of their local supervisor of elections office, such a charge would generally be baseless, though that fact hasn't stopped Republican operatives from targeting alleged fraudulent voters who voted legally. If one does not vote, there is no fraud whether intentional or actual. Think for a minute about what happened the last time you voted (at least in the Sunshine State, Florida, where most of my readers live). Like me, you probably received a letter from your county Supervisor of Elections possibly with a sample ballot and informing you of the address of your voter precinct along with voting rules (bring legal photo ID, etc.). When you walked into your precinct, you most likely walked over to a check-in or sign-in point, where you were asked to produce your ID. Your ID was then checked against the voter database either on a laptop or a voter printout. If your information matched the rolls AND you were at the correct precinct, you were then allowed to vote. Otherwise, you would be directed to the correct precinct (I had this happen earlier this year in the 2008 Florida primary elections because I had moved to a new neighborhood and forgot to inform the local SOE office) OR handed a provisional ballot which is not processed until the days following the election, and counted only if you are confirmed as a registered voter. Of course, the process may differ due to voting laws which vary by state.

Now down to the brass tacks as they say. There are several ways that the Republican Party under the guidance of Karl Rove, architect of the George W. Bush elections, have themselves been engaging in voter fraud & suppression leading up to the crucial 2008 elections. Caging which involves compiling lists of registered voters whose registration is challenged after an election, purging state voter rolls either randomly or by targeting groups of people more likely to vote Democratic such as former felons who have had their voting rights restored just before elections, etc. The good folks over at Inteldaily.com have posted an article detailing various voter suppression tactics:

Voter suppression also includes tactics like false notices announcing changes of election dates; police cruisers at intersections near voting places; threats that voters will be challenged; poorly trained poll workers who send registered voters away; special identification requirements proven to reduce the vote (e.g., photo identification); and much, much more. The newest rage is "cleansing" centralized registration databases. The Florida pre-2000 voter registration purge of tens of thousands of minority voters cost Al Gore the election and inspired federal policies supporting registration cleansing around the country.

Then there are the seemingly endless examples of electronic voting machines improperly recording and counting votes plus security problems. There are no real methods of checking electronic voting. Even if you could and proved fraud, state recount laws are very difficult to invoke and highly restrictive. In Virginia and Florida, for example, it is illegal to recount the paper forms for optical scan voting machines as part of a recount.

What a total mess and a complete mockery of the democracy that we deserve. But when you add up all of these strategies, based on past performance, they work at the margins - maybe a 3-4% shift in votes to the Republican candidate.

A telling NY Times article from April 2007, "In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud" discusses the alleged voter fraud problem and provides a useful graphic showing statistics of US government trials from 2002-2007 and the resulting convictions, acquittals, and dismissals of cases involving alleged voter fraud. The statistics clearly speak for themselves, and out of 95 total persons prosecuted for voter fraud in those 5 years, 25 people/cases were acquitted or dismissed. Of the convictions 26 cases involved individual voters, some of whom were simply people who forgot a minor detail on their application, 31 cases involved party or campaign workers, 10 involved government officials, and 3 involved election workers. Though to hear the GOP talk about it, one would think that the problem is so wide-spread that millions of people must be voting illegally, but NO that is not actually the case.

The final analysis is that we as individual voters must be vigilant when it comes to protecting our voting rights and immediately report any voting discrepancies to voter watchdog agencies, the ACLU, voting rights attorneys, etc. Thankfully the Democratic Party and Obama for America will have attorneys and certified poll watchers blanketing precincts throughout the entire state of Florida on Tuesday, November 4 to ensure that shenanigans don't occur. It will be one of the largest legal efforts in the history of US Presidential elections. Let's hope it helps. One of my current focuses in my blogging and voter awareness efforts is educating Tampa Bay voters about their rights as well as voting rules passed by the State of Florida. Later this week I will post information from the Obama campaign debunking several viral voting myths that have circulated online and on several radio stations in Florida.

Darren Hauck for The New York Times
Nashawna Prude, 9, with a family photo that includes her grandmother, Kimberly, second from left, jailed for more than a year for voter fraud.

Look, John McCain Has a Black Supporter!

Oh my goodness, the end of the world is approaching! One of the most played up scenes on national news in the past few weeks is from a McCain-Palin campaign rally in Wisconsin at which a Black man urged McCain to "take it to Obama". This struck me as appalling considering McCain's record or lack thereof when it comes to civil rights (the ACLU rates McCain 0% on Civil Rights, the worst possible rating) and initiatives concerning the Black community that any Black person would support, much less defend Senator McCain or beg him to attack one of the greatest community and political leaders of our lifetime who is of multicultural heritage.

Sure, like most Republicans during election season, GOP candidates tend to try to whip up the Latino vote, particularly the reliably Republican-voting Florida Cuban community which tends to be more financially prosperous with a higher per capita income than most other Latino groups. Let's not even mention the fact that recent McCain-Palin rallies have been rife with supporters making racial threats against Obama, saying despicable things like "Kill him [Obama]!", "Terrorist", "Off with his head", and in some cases telling Black media in attendance to "Sit down, N-word". And yes, many of these statements have been caught on camera, so no one can deny that it is happening. What we also can't deny is that in none of these instances have we seen McCain or Palin rebuking their supporters for giving their rallies a distinct political lynch mob vibe. I for one, as a Black man, would not feel comfortable in that type of atmosphere.

As far as McCain's record goes, here are the facts. McCain was one of the few Congressmen to vote against making Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday a national holiday. Earlier this year, he appeared at the National Civil Rights Museum to apologize for his error in judgement. It took him 20 years--when running for President the second time--to make this statement. Now to his credit, in the past, McCain has supported affirmative action, though he says something different now that he is the Republican candidate. If you still don't believe me, consider the following exchange between McCain and a reporter while McCain in Florida with Governor Charlie Crist, was asked on camera, "Senator can you explain why you and your campaign manager have specifically said that Obama played the race card with his comments the other day. Can you elaborate, when you said you fought for equal rights your entire life, what specifically you have done in improving the life of African-Americans?" It took McCain a few seconds of awkward silence and a stuttering response, then asking for the question to be repeated.

Anyway, here's the video from Wisconsin. Thank goodness, AOL Voices posted this video because my wife and I had been looking for it and couldn't find it. Ahhh, the wonders of Youtube! Essence Magazine also interviewed James T. Harris and you can read that interview on Essence.com.

Text from James T. Harris' comments are as follows:

"How you doing Sir. Listen I want to say first of all, God bless you, Gov Palin, you are a Barracuda, we need that...I would also like to say, God bless you Senator for your service for this country and your leadership. Now Senator, at the convention you asked for us to fight for you, you asked that. I have to tell you, I doubt if there is anyone in this room that's taken the--pardon me--@*%-whoopin I have taken for supporting you... (thunderous applause from the all-white audience)

Sir I believe that in the next coming debate it is absolutely vital that you take it to Obama, that you hit him where it hurts in his soft spot. Sir ACORN is out there, we have the good Rev. Wright. we have [Father Michael] Pfleger, we have all these shady characters that have surrounded him. We have corruption here in Wisconsin and voting across the nation. I am begging you sir, I'm begging you, take it to him.