Deep Thought

Filed in National by on October 25, 2008

If the Republicans cheat again and claim that John McCain and Sarah Palin won this election there should be a big general strike, riots and weeks of civil unrest followed by trials of the people who rigged the votes in Ohio, Florida and Nevada.

All the people who took part in the fraud should be hung for treason – including TV talking heads who lied and said that Obama lost. 

 

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (37)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. Common Sense Political Thought » Archives » Some Saturday linkage | October 25, 2008
  1. Steve Newton says:

    Hoping this is satire, but fearing that it’s not….

  2. FSP says:

    Yeah, this is DD-grade unhinged.

  3. liberalgeek says:

    Oh crap, a 3 way agreement with Steve and Dave… Checking for a plague of locusts now.

    Although I am OK with the strike and prosecution of the guilty.

  4. anonone says:

    Really Steve and FSP? So if the vote is stolen (again) by using rigged machines or some other trickery, you think we should all be happy and pretend like it never happened (again).

    Perhaps the appearance of Democracy is more important to you than the real thing. Perhaps you don’t think freedom is worth fighting for after all.

    No wonder democracy in America is hanging by a thread (maybe). If everybody was like you in 1776, we’d still be ruled by a British king.

    (For the record, I don’t agree with the hanging part.)

  5. jason330 says:

    Steve & Dave are fine with election fraud provided a Republican wins.

  6. anonone says:

    A bit off, but is DL going to have a thread at some point to discuss any coordinated GOTV efforts?

    I’ve been going to PA to work since it is usually a close swing state, but I wonder what others are doing this year?

    You might consider such a post closer to election day. Thanks.

  7. Mike Protack says:

    It is amazing to me most contributors at this site declare Republicans to be completely incompetent at everything they do yet at the same time you say the Republicans can orchestrate a ‘taking’ of the 2008 vote?

    The two dots do not connect.

  8. Truth Teller says:

    Mike you should know about incompetance for you let a downstate farmer like Lee kick your ass.

  9. Moocher says:

    Jason in all his glory…..

  10. anonone says:

    Mike P-

    Repubs are utterly incompetent at governing in a free democracy. One reason is because they excel in corruption. Kapish?

  11. FSP says:

    Although I do hear that tin foil is on sale at your local grocer….

  12. Dana Garrett says:

    Why does the subtext of killing Republicans come up on this website in one form or another again & again? DL has become a reactionary blog.

  13. Dana says:

    I suppose it has never occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, John McCain might actually win the election legitimately?

  14. Rebecca says:

    A Republican win a race legititimately? BWAAHAHAHAH

  15. anon says:

    Your right for once Protack! Voter fraud and voter suppression are the only way the repukes can win. Karl Rove and his computer experts are now under investigation as one of the “experts” has written a scathing book on how they used computers to steal 2000 and 04. Not this time. The votes are overwhelmingly in support of Obama/Biden, any attempts this time to send “votes from voting machines in 7 battleground states to a computer in Tennessee, Alabama where the votes is changed and sent back to the voting booth” will be challenged. We know how they did it in the past 2 elections and the author of book has exposed it all. Interesting enough the “expert who wrote the book claims the anti-abortion, pro-life freaks ” are behind it all.

    We are talking cultists, like the woman from Pittsburgh yesterday. That dog won’t hunt and repukes are out of time.

  16. jason330 says:

    Dana –

    I’m not talking about killing Republican in general, just Republicans that are guilty of treason.

  17. jason330 says:

    I’m not surprised that Steve and Dave are okay with treason by the way.

  18. Dana Garrett says:

    “I’m not talking about killing Republican in general, just Republicans that are guilty of treason.”

    Suppose some Dems are caught engaging in voter fraud, should they be hanged too?

  19. Steve Newton says:

    jason
    If you define treason as anything other than your candidate winning, then yes I’m OK with that.

    Now that we have two DL commenters using exterminationist political rhetoric–and then defending it–can we make it three? Anybody else want to advocate the death penalty for bad reporting or voter fraud?

  20. anonone says:

    Hey Steve,

    Imagine it is January 19, 2009 – Mcinsane and Pain are going to be sworn-in tomorrow – and it has just been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the vote was rigged. What would you do?

  21. jason330 says:

    Nothing. He’d be happy about it. The guy hates Obama. Have you read his blog?

  22. Steve Newton says:

    Anonone,
    If you’ve got the evidence “beyond a shadow of a doubt” then take it to court….

    As a matter of fact, that’s the only legal way to establish it beyond a shadow of a doubt. I’ll be right there beside you in a class action suit or kicking in money….

    But one thing I won’t do is condone the descent into even worse banana republic politics and threats of violence….

    What about the reverse? Suppose it had been shown that the 150 million raised by the Obama campaign this month had been used to commit massive voter fraud? What would you do then? Accept it, because the candidate you preferred was the beneficiary–or will you crap out and say, “Oh, that couldn’t happen with Obama.”

    The system is imperfect: JFK undoubtedly won Illinois based on voter fraud in 1960; Dubya entered office on similar terms in 2000. You’re already on record as saying voter fraud is the only way the GOP could win, so your standard of “beyond a shadow of a doubt” is pretty suspect in the first place.

    As for jason–I’ve said on several occasions that I think both Obama and McCain are not my choices–right now I plan on voting for Nader, given the choices on the DE ballot. Some kind of shitty Republican I make.

  23. Dana Garrett says:

    “What about the reverse? Suppose it had been shown that the 150 million raised by the Obama campaign this month had been used to commit massive voter fraud? What would you do then?”

    I asked the same question above. So far Jason isn’t answering.

  24. jason330 says:

    What’s the punishment for treason? It is hanging right? I’m not a big capital punishment guy – but the past 8 years have changed my mind with regard to capital punishment and election rigging.

    I think we all agree that justice should be done.

  25. Steve Newton says:

    jason
    Not that it matters, but it’s time for you to quit making up shit again.

    Show or link to a blog post where I have expressed hatred for Obama instead of disagreement with his policies.

    Find just one.

    Or else shut the hell up after admitting you are making stuff up again.

    Put up or shut up time.

  26. jason330 says:

    Hold it. It might take a few minutes.

  27. Steve Newton says:

    Nearly three hours and counting.

    C’mon, little fella. Find me some hate.

  28. anonone says:

    Hi Steve,

    Thanks for the answer.

    “If you’ve got the evidence “beyond a shadow of a doubt” then take it to court….”

    Like that worked out well for us before (remember Bush v. Gore?). The courts, as we have learned, are not above politics. And by “us”, I mean all American voters, not R’s or D’s.

    If it was Obama and the Dems that were shown to have committed massive voting fraud that changed the election outcome, my answer would be exactly the same.

    The system is imperfect because it is designed to protect incumbents. Voting processes could be fixed in 12 months in this country with federal standards that are auditable, open, and verifiable, and public campaign financing. But, 8 years after Florida, things are not any better.

    So when do we, as citizens, take to the streets?

    BTW, I am not on record as saying, “voter fraud is the only way the GOP could win”. I hope you don’t start making stuff up.

  29. jason330 says:

    here you go.

    That took about ten seconds.

  30. Steve Newton says:

    jason
    Show me the hate; anybody else feel free to read it. It’s a list of predictions about policy and politics.

    So, according to jason, officially: anybody who thinks an Obama policy is bad, is a hater.

    Thanks, little fella, for clearing that up.

    Please also pay attention to the last line: My only consolation is that, if by some miracle Senator John McCain pulls out an upset, things would probably be … worse.

  31. Steve Newton says:

    anoneone

    If I implied you said the only way the GOP could win it was unintentional–sorry.

    You say, Like that worked out well for us before (remember Bush v. Gore?). The courts, as we have learned, are not above politics. And by “us”, I mean all American voters, not R’s or D’s.

    The courts aren’t above politics–never have been–but they are what we’ve got as an alternative to burning down the house.

    I belong to a party that has–just this year–seen five obviously politicized court decisions keep my part off the presidential ballot. That makes me furious–it doesn’t make me want to invoke a general strike or violence, because no matter what else happens, that would be far worse.

    Too many people, for example, view the Civil War as a necessary crusade to end slavery, and fail to realize that it was the ultimate breakdown of the American political system that cost 2 million lives. The road jason is suggesting is, potentially, that road.

  32. jason330 says:

    uber-Statist politician beholden to the usual assortment of special interests

    Okay Steve, that’s not loaded or anything. You are clearly a disinterested arbiter.

  33. anonone says:

    Hi Steve,

    I am not suggesting violence or civil war, and I sympathize with the plight of third parties in America, such as your own party.

    But what I am suggesting is that if we are having an election stolen or on the verge of being stolen, then we need to go down the road of resistance – be that a general strike, non-violent civil disobedience, or other drastic measures in-keeping with the spirit of our Declaration of Independence and the history of progressive social change in our country.

    What is the alternative? Surrendering to politicized courts and a dictatorship under the illusion of democracy? Unfortunately, in our entertainment-opiated country, many would be perfectly content with just that.

    I am an advocate of non-violent actions only. But I also understand that all successful non-violent social changes, from Ghandi to King, had a simmering group of potentially violent activists ready to go to battle if the non-violent movement did not to succeed. Perhaps Jason speaks to that voice. That is why we need election reform and campaign financing reform so desperately in this country.

    If we can’t be 100% sure that our votes are counted as accurately as possible then we really don’t have a certain and faithful democracy.

  34. Steve Newton says:

    jason
    1) I never claimed to be a disinterested observer, did I? I said I was not voting for either of them months ago.

    2) uber-Statist politician beholden to the usual assortment of special interests

    Let’s parse that:

    I’ve made a strong case repeatedly that both McCain and Obama are beholden to special interests–Obama in particular to certain defense industry and financial interests. Hell, I’ve made that case here, and while cassandra disagreed with me strongly nobody including you ever labeled raising that issue as “hate”

    As for uber-Statist, that’s an accurate Libertarian definition of a traditional politician who believes that the primary answer to nearly every policy issue is to increase the power of the state. That’s the Libertarian equivalent of you saying that one of my candidates has blind faith in the free market.

    From the website that uses McInsane, calls a major presidential candidate a senile racist, you consider me describing Senator Obama as a Statist [a definition I would also apply to Senator McCain] an example of hate speech…

    Little fella, you got nothing. In fact, you’re pretty much engaging in Republican thinking.

  35. Steve Newton says:

    anonone

    If we can’t be 100% sure that our votes are counted as accurately as possible then we really don’t have a certain and faithful democracy.

    We’ve never, not once in our history, been able to have that 100% certainty. It doesn’t exist. We have an imperfect democracy that lurches along from crisis to crisis, and has been nearly or actually stolen on more than one occasion–beginning in 1800, just over a decade after it was created.

    The same court system that gave us Plessy v Freguson and Bush v Gore also gave us Brown v the Board of Education of Topeka KS and Roe v Wade. Protest all you want (and I’m glad to hear you say non-violently), but where do you expect it to go?

    The day I most respected Al Gore was the day he realized that to fight on after the Supreme Court ruling would have been worse than the first four years of Dubya–and bad as those four years were, he was right.

  36. anonone says:

    Steve,

    I think the key that you missed as “as accurately as possible”. We have the technology to do that much much better than we are actually doing today. I agree that our democracy has been far from perfect, but I also think you’ll agree that we could have a much fairer and honest electoral process if we as a nation had the political will to make that happen.

    A general strike would, I think, provide the political will. Unfortunately, I am afraid that we are too far removed from our own revolution.

    I am not sure that I agree with your assessment of the consequences of Gore’s refusal to fight on after the SCOTUS ruling.

    Anyway, good discussion.