Bush Does NOT Have a Mandate

The newly elected President sounded more giddy than sensible the day after his narrow victory when he bragged about having a mandate. A 51%-49% squeak is hardly a mandate. However, the Prez may be a little confused about the meaning of mandate. In the past, the BushMen have loosely bandied the word about as though it means “a razor-thin slant to the right”. For Democrats, the next couple of weeks are going to be the toughest of George W. Bush’s second term. It’s going to be hard to take--the victory speeches, the boasting, the neocon claim of vindication with the unsettling subtext that they plan to turn the nation into a totalitarian police state. But while we lay low and let the Republican euphoria swirl around us, we can begin to think clearly about our mandate. On November 3rd, John Kerry conceded the 2004 election to Bush. As soon as Kerry perceived that he could not prevail in a prolonged fight to contest the vote count, he conceded the contest to Bush and it was the right thing for him to do. It was the honorable thing for him to do. However, when Kerry conceded the election, it did not mean that we should stop our investigation into voter fraud. As a matter of fact it frees us to use our energies to begin an investigation in earnest. Yes, the election of 2004 was stolen. Yes, the election of 2000 was stolen. Yes, Bush could not win without the massive collusion of like-minded felonious Repugs. But how do we prove it? And that is our mission. That is where our focus needs to be aimed. That is our task. If half of this nation does not care that the Bush administration lied and deceived the world to promote an unnecessary war, we care. If half of this nation is so obsessed with homophobia and anti-abortion born-again prejudice that they don’t care if the Bush administration is pushing an agenda to authorize civil rights violations at home and global oppression abroad, we care. George W. Bush and his henchmen must be stopped. And the first step is to get proof that illegal methods were used to defraud the voters. The use of voting machines that don’t leave a paper trail may have allowed massive tinkering with the votes. But that kind of techie manipulation always leaves a trail of its own back to the diddlers. Who did it? Who authorized it? The proof is there. All we need to do is find it.