http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/11/26/...aine/index.html
| QUOTE |
| President Bush declared Friday that charges of voter fraud have cast doubt on the Ukrainian election, and warned that any European-negotiated pact on Iran's nuclear program must ensure the world can verify Tehran's compliance. "The only good deal is one that's verifiable," the president told reporters as he emerged from his Texas ranch for a brief visit to a coffee shop. Bush issued a new appeal for the power to delete specific items that he deems excessive from budget plans. He spoke a week after Congress approved a $388 billion spending package that lawmakers loaded up with special items for their home-state industries and communities. The president said he was not troubled by the total cost of the measure, which he said conformed to the outlines of spending requests he had made to lawmakers. But, he said, "there's going to be things in these big bills that I don't particularly care for." "The only way a president can affect that which is inside the bill, other than vetoing the entire bill, is to be able to pick out parts of a bill and express displeasure about it through a line-item veto. I hope the Congress will give me a line-item veto." In 1997 the Supreme Court ruled that line-item veto power gave the president unconstitutionally broad latitude to change laws enacted by Congress. Bush has said he wants a new law that would pass constitutional muster. World affairs dominated Bush's remarks here. He said he had lent his voice earlier in the day to new efforts to achieve a stable, joint Catholic-Protestant government in Northern Ireland. Bush called Ian Paisley, whose Democratic Unionist Party represents most of Northern Ireland's British Protestant majority, to try to nudge the process forward. The president waded in ahead of what is expected to be a week of high-stakes negotiations on the details, and Bush aides said they expected him to call Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams as early as Saturday. "Hopefully it will help," Bush said of his telephone diplomacy. "Anything I can do to help keep the process moving forward, I'm more than willing to do so." The United States and other Western nations contend that massive fraud marred the presidential runoff election Sunday in Ukraine, and the country's highest court has ordered election officials not to publish the results until an appeal is heard next week. Earlier this week, Secretary of State Colin Powell cited reports of fraud in the election in saying the United States cannot accept the results of presidential elections in Ukraine. "There's just a lot of allegations of vote fraud that placed their election, the validity of their elections, in doubt," Bush said. "The international community is watching very carefully. People are paying very close attention to this, and hopefully it will be resolved in a way that brings credit and confidence to the Ukrainian government." Bush did not directly answer a question about what consequences Ukraine might face if the dispute is not resolved to his satisfaction. Powell said there would be consequences for U.S.-Ukraine relations if the government there did not act "immediately and responsibly" to find a solution that respected the will of its people. As Bush spoke, several dozen Ukrainian protesters stood across the street, waving their country's flag and calling on Bush to press for a fair election result. "Will President George W. Bush now stand up to Russia's blatant imperial overreach in Ukraine?" wrote Michael Balahutrak of Houston in literature distributed at the gathering. Bush also applauded efforts by Britain, Germany and France to get Iran to honor its international treaty obligations to refrain from developing nuclear weapons. But he said he was wary about whether Tehran could be trusted to honor its obligations. "The only good deal is one that's verifiable," Bush said, adding that British Prime Minister Tony Blair had assured him he would seek such a pact. The United States has accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons. Iran and European negotiators reached a tentative compromise on a deal committing Tehran to freeze all uranium enrichment activities, diplomats said Friday, but the Iranian government still must approve the agreement. On Iraq, Bush said he remained hopeful that the country would conduct elections scheduled for Jan. 30, despite a demand Friday by 17 political parties in Iraq that the interim government postpone them for at least six months. Those groups want security at polling places to be ensured. "The Iraq election commission has scheduled elections in January, and I would hope they would go forward in January," Bush said. Late Friday, the White House announced Bush would visit Halifax, Nova Scotia, during a trip to Canada next week. On Sept. 11, 2001, more than 200 jetliners heading for the United States were diverted to Canada after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. About 7,000 people on 44 planes went to Halifax. |
| QUOTE (catabryna @ Sunday, 28 November 2004, 5:35 am) |
| and, damn, I'm really missing my Ukrainian flag gif right now! |
| QUOTE |
| "The only good deal is one that's verifiable," Bush said, adding that British Prime Minister Tony Blair had assured him he would seek such a pact. |
| QUOTE |
| Following the Ukrainian Lead By James A. Nickel t r u t h o u t | Perspective Saturday 27 November 2004 Watching the newsreels of Ukrainians taking to the streets by the hundreds of thousands to protest an election they believe was fraudulent, one has to wonder what Americans are thinking and feeling. Perhaps some are gleaning morsels of vicarious vindication or harboring envious longing for justice they couldn't get here in the bastion of democracy. How does an American escape the irony that the Bush Administration has smugly rejected the Ukrainian results due to election irregularities? One also might wonder: What do Ukrainians know that Americans don't? For one, they know what it's like to live under an oppressive regime (something Americans are likely on their way to learning). They've also learned to trust in their own observations, judgments and intuition, while relegating "official" information to its rightfully dubious place. In the US, the predictable media mantra started the day after the election: "The election is over...its time to move forward." True to form, American citizens have uncritically complied. Defeated, downtrodden, exhausted, and eager to move past their grief, the half of America that opposed Bush can't bear the thought that another election may have been stolen. Even some progressives are falling in line. But what are the implications of ignoring electoral corruption? Perhaps we should ask a few outraged Ukrainians. Like the Ukrainians, some Americans predicted our election would be stolen and even outlined how it would be done. Americans should have taken to the streets and stormed the federal and state capitols when they first learned that Republican-backing corporations would control the means and methods of tabulating their votes. Although several organizations and thousands of people took part in admirable efforts to require paper trails, it wasn't enough. Most Americans either didn't hear the message or didn't want to hear it. Among the progressives who did, much of their energy was consumed in the intensive campaigning process. Some Kerry activists naively hoped to address the looming threat by garnering enough votes to overcome the potential fraud and disenfranchisement. Now that the predictable damage is done, Americans are amazingly more silent than before the election: like Seligman's shocked dogs, seemingly resigned to learned helplessness. Perhaps some are afraid of supporting or fighting for post-election investigations, concerned that, if they do not ultimately show that Kerry would've won, they will have been proved wrong and wasted energy and resources - what would be the point? This mindset, epitomized by Kerry's concession speech statement, "we cannot win," has carried over into defeatist post-election attitudes and action. What Kerry and many of his supporters don't understand is that the critical post-election battle is not about John Kerry. What is at stake is far greater. Democracy is not about men; it's about ideals. The battle which must be fought is one to save representative democracy from the final death blow that will be dealt by ignoring the widespread electoral problems of the past two presidential elections. Unlike the Ukrainians, Americans still take too much for granted. We still cling to the myth that America is inherently different from other societies: that democracy is enduring, that crime in high places is rare (ie. Nixon was a fluke), that we are permanently immune to tyranny. We defer to the principal of "innocent until proven guilty" while shrugging off mounting evidence that wrongdoing has taken place. We dismiss the intuitive observation, "where there's smoke, there's fire," while choking on the smoldering aftermath of our election. We ignore millennia of history demonstrating that powerpaths will pursue whatever schemes necessary to maintain power. Indeed, they typically usurp power incrementally, pushing the envelope and testing the boundaries. As George Soros has observed, when those boundary tests are successfully passed, the dominant paradigm (and associated behavior) is further reinforced and perpetuated. Considering the relative ease with which the Bush administration stole the 2000 election, deceived the congress and American people, and impudently committed crimes against the international community, why wouldn't they take steps readily available to them (via Diebold, Jeb Bush, Kenneth Blackwell, et al.) to stay in power by stealing another election? After all, they're on one hell of a roll. If the corrupt precedents set in yet another election again go unquestioned, won't the Bush regime essentially have an implicit mandate to do more of the same and worse? Progressives should take note and take heart from the actions of the Ukrainians. Over 50 million Americans opposed Bush at the polls. It's not necessary to stage a March on Washington tomorrow in order to make a contribution. We can initiate or join any number of efforts, from local to national, forming coalitions, pooling money and human resources toward legal challenges on every level. We can donate or get involved in organizations like blackboxvoting.org. We can inundate Congress with demands for investigations. We can pressure news media to stop marginalizing election reform efforts by telling us to move on. We can educate the general public about what's at stake and what they can do about it. We can (and must) launch relentless, full-scale, legal assaults on the usurpation of our voting systems by unscrupulous corporations and upon the flagrant conflicts of interest presented by secretaries of state working for the campaigns of candidates who are running in the elections they oversee. Proprietary trade secrets of Diebold and ES&S must be smashed in the courts and the legislatures lest democracy be smashed in the wake of the incestuous marriage of right-wing government and corporate power. Meanwhile we must remember that the movement is not for or about John Kerry. Its purpose is to demonstrate to the powerpaths who continue wresting away control of our country that they will be relentlessly challenged. Progressive Americans must, at a minimum, demand uncompromising reforms to our electoral system before it becomes irrelevant. It would be an abandonment of principles and duties to country if we didn't. Indeed, it would be unpatriotic. |
| QUOTE (catabryna @ Sunday, 28 November 2004, 8:35 am) |
| Obviously, for myself, this is the hottest news out there. I've been saving pictures and printing articles left and right so that I'm able to give my son an education on what real civil dissent is and when it's called for. Unlike our placidity here in the U.S., these Ukrainians know exactly what is at stake for their country and they aren't afraid to peacefully make their wishes known. I can just imagine what Independence Square is like at just this moment, and I must say, these people really want their freedom! I just smile from ear to ear watching it all unfold. Lovin' every minute of it, and even though Alexsei is only four, I am talking to him about how proud he should be of his birth country. Cat and, damn, I'm really missing my Ukrainian flag gif right now! |

| QUOTE |
| Welcome back to the BuzzFlash.com GOP Hypocrite of the Week. This week BuzzFlash goes International. Voter suppression, stolen ballots, fraudulent vote counts, misleading electioneering phone calls, discarded voter registration forms, exit polls that don't reflect the official government results, and more! Such behavior would put a real stain of credibility on democracy. That is, it would everywhere but in America, apparently. We aren't sure why the Bush Cartel is coming down so hard on Ukraine Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych. After all, he is only accused of doing what the Bush campaign did in Ohio, Florida, and several other states. If anything, Yanukovych, were he American, would have probably held a key spot on the Bush/Cheney "steal democracy a second time around" team. I mean, how hard can the Republicans come down on a guy who knows that it is not the votes that count, but who counts the votes? Since the electronic voting machine companies in the U.S., who keep their software private, are pretty much a Republican concession -- and key states (Florida and Ohio) are controlled by Republican operatives whose goal is to win at all costs, in spite of democracy -- you'd think Bush would already have had Yanukovych to the Oval Office for a photo-op. After all, Yanukovych is truly a Bush kindred spirit, worthy of a wink, a nod, and lots of juicy contracts from Bush contributors. But politics plays itself out in strange ways. And while Ken Blackwell, Ohio's Katherine Harris, is ready to announce Bush the winner of a highly disputed vote count in the Buckeye State, the White House is making all sorts of noises about democracy in Kiev, while we get one-party rule in America. You see, Bush, we all know, doesn't believe in democracy. He is playing a high stakes game to try and yank Ukraine out from under his former "soul brother's" sphere of influence. That's right Bush has soured on Putin, the former KGB Chief who once made George's heart go pit-a-patter, and Ukraine can play a significant role in the U.S./Russian battle over Eastern Europe, control of the Black Sea, and even figures in the oil transport "big game." So, Bush doesn't give a whit about democracy in the Ukraine. It's all about power. To get under the skin of Putin, Bush is willing to sell out his real election stealing soulmate, Ukraine Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, our International BuzzFlash GOP Hypocrite of the week. They say journalists at Ukraine's state-owned television stations revolted against the rigged election. In America, they just cash in their fat paychecks and parrot the party line. Until next week, just remember our motto at BuzzFlash.com: So many Republican hypocrites, so little time. Catch up with you soon. |
| QUOTE (logosoco @ Sunday, 5 December 2004, 7:29 am) |
| One would think that with all of our "modern technology" elections would be a breeze. |
| QUOTE |
| Grand Chessboard Ukraine: Key Square on the "Grand Chessboard" Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives has served as a blueprint for world dictatorship, and an incriminating predictor of post-9/11 world conflict. Against today's explosive headlines, Brzezinski's words are, once again, nightmarishly relevant: "Geopolitical pivots are the states whose importance is derived not from their power and motivation but rather from their sensitive location and from the consequences of their potentially vulnerable condition for the behavior of geostrategic players. Most often, geopolitical pivots are determined by their geography, which in some cases gives them a special role in either defining access to important areas or in denying resources to a significant player [my emphasis-LC]." |