I’m browsing the coverage of Barak Obama’s win in Wisconsin the other day and a thought starts gnawing at me from the recesses of my cynical mind. Unlike the Republican primaries, the Democratic primaries for the President are open to independent voters as well as registered democrats. This basically means anyone can walk in and vote. What if a mad Republican strategist, say Karl “the godfather” Rove, has concocted a plan to flood Democratic primaries with Obama votes to either drag out the Barak-Hillary in-fighting so by the time they get to the convention they’d be good and bloody; or even better, get Obama to become the Democratic nominee. Think about it. Quite a few of Obama’s victories have come in states not exactly known as Democratic hotbeds, including Utah and Oklahoma. How many registered Democrats are there in Utah, five? This is supposed to be evidence of Obama’s electability in states where Democrats don’t do well traditionally. But I think not. Before you crack a crackpot joke, wait a Manchurian-Candidate- moment. Voting fraud and election rigging are as old as democracy itself. In ancient Athens and Rome the senate candidates did their vote buying above the board and in plain light of day handing out cold coins and casks of wine to the citizenry. In the good old USA itself, especially with its city-boss and states right system, “delivering” the vote was and still remains (Florida’s deeply tainted election in favour George W Bush in 2000) a time honoured tradition - by both parties by the way - the most famous recent example of it being when back in early Sixties the Chicago mob boasted about having “delivered” the town to JFK. The head of the Kennedy clan, Joe Kennedy, was tight with the mob from way back in his bootlegging days. Since the late Sixties the Republicans have become increasingly militant in their quest to as Rove once put it boldly turn the United States into a virtual one-party system. Anyone remember Watergate? Just rent a copy of All the President’s Men; it's an education. Republicans infiltrated Edmund Muskie’s campaign in ’72 – their “dirty tricks” against Nixon’s perceived enemies was dubbed ratfucking - planting embarrassing stuff in his campaign headquarters and generally trying to sabotage his operation. Watergate of course was an out and out covert op, albeit poorly executed, by an unholy mix of CIA affiliates and sleazy Cuban exiles. Running against George McGovern, Muskie was thought to be the more electable candidate. Well, McGovern became the Democratic nominee and Nixon won a landslide victory in the middle of an allegedly unpopular war which he had promised to end back in ’68 and had since escalated greatly. Most of the current president’s men, including Dick “I’ll fuck anyone, anytime, anywhere” Cheney, used to be Nixon’s men and some of the most powerful Republican strategists and insiders hail from the reign of tricky Dickie. Judging from the Repulicans’ record in the past thirty years including the constant strings of manufactured crisis during the Clinton years (imagine trying to impeach a president who presided over 8 years of economic growth and prosperity, a rather business friendly president, because he lied about having got a couple of blow jobs from an intern) they would do anything to hang on to power. Political power seems to have become a right to the Republican Party rather than a privilege bestowed upon by the electorate.
But can this vote flooding really be possible at this large scale and if so, can it be kept hushed up? Quit possible, especially by the Christian Right. Organization used to be a catch phrase of the Left but no longer. In recent years it’s the Right, especially the religious Right that has been dynamic, energized and organized. Anyone remember the mass viewings of Mel Gibson’s Passion of Christ organized by the churches and on-line prayer groups? Why can’t these same networks, sort of modern version of Free Mason networks, be organized to flood the Democratic primaries with a few thousand committed “brothers and sisters”?
But why would the Republicans want Obama running against McCain instead of Hillary? I don’t live in the United States but as an outsider observing the American scene from Canada, I believe that in a general election, Americans will not elect a young, rather inexperienced Black man with a conspicuously absent Nigerian father and an ex-hippie white mother who at one point while living in Indonesia with his mother and his Indonesian step father allegedly frequented a madrassa. Need I spill out the hatchet job awaiting candidate Obama? John McCain on the other hand is a former “war hero” from the heartland with the required experience to manage the wars that America must reluctantly fight on behalf of the free world; an economic conservative, a money Republican really, known for his bi-partisan pragmatism, not a Bush insider. And did I forget to mention that he is white? Just a thought, folks, mull it over.
|Recently by Asghar_Massombagi||Comments||Date|
|Stoning - Monty Python|
|Sep 21, 2010|
|The Invention of Jewish People|
|Nov 24, 2009|
|Oct 13, 2009|
|نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز||Dec 04|
|Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day||Lawyer says death sentence suspended||Dec 03|
|Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day||Iterview with mother||Dec 02|
|احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱||Dec 02|
|Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day||46 days on hunger strike||Dec 01|
|Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti||In Barcelona||Nov 30|
|گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی||Nov 30|
|Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day||Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years||Nov 30|
|محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین||Nov 29|
|Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day||Kurdish Activist on Death Row||Nov 28|