October 31, 2008 11:25 AM

ABC News' Steven Portnoy reports: In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.

Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

However she feels about the way her story has been told in the press, Palin told WMAL she is not discouraged.

"It's sort of perplexing to me, because I'm a practical person and plainspoken also, but just cutting to the chase and calling things like I see them, just like most Americans. But this has not left a bitter taste in my mouth, the bitter shots taken by the mainstream media and by some of the elitism there in Washington," Palin said.

"What this has left me with is a very energized and positive feeling about America, because there are enough Americans who are desiring the positive change that John McCain's gonna usher in."

Plante then suggested that in her next sit-down interview, Palin should tap the reporter on the knee and ask, "So who you votin' for?"

Palin laughed and said, "Yeah, maybe that just would say it all."

"I'm gonna try that," she said.

[col. writ. 11/04/08] (c) '08 Mumia Abu-Jamal

The count has been called and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. has become the 44th President of the United States of America.

But, in truth, history will record him as #1 - the first African-American president.

It is undeniable that this is a singular political achievement, a work of impressive political skill, and (we must admit) a gift of the political gods.

Among friends, in the privacy of a prison visiting room I've often made the following half-joke. Obama wins handsomely, and in his acceptance speech, flush with victory, loaded with 'political capital', he would open by saying, "My fellow Americans -- first and foremost, I want to thank the one person who made my election possible (if not inevitable): George W. Bush!"

I always got a laugh, for like all good jokes the truth makes it happen.

And the truth is, without the blunders of Bush, Obama would've been an also-ran. His fundamental issue, which set him apart from the rest of the Democratic pack, was his early opposition to the Iraq War. That gave him a wind that carried him far and long beyond his competitors, who were, for the most part, half-hearted war supporters -- or worse, people who supported the war only because to not do so, would've harmed their political careers (or so they thought).

That wind carried him to the Oval Office, the grandest prize in U.S. politics.

But what does it mean?

We cannot deny its symbolic value. In millions of Black homes, his picture will be placed on walls, beside Martin, John F. Kennedy, and a pale painting of Jesus. I'd be that quite a few African homes (especially in Kenya) will also boast his smiling visage.

But beyond symbol is substance, and substantively, some scholars have defined Obama as little different from his predecessors. Political scientist Clarence Lusane, writing in a recent issue of The Black Scholar pointed to the money men behind both Obama and the Democratic Party, and noted the following:

The promotion of U.S. hegemony, expansion of markets for U.S. corporations, security-based multilateral relations, protectionist trade policies, and a focus on terrorism will likely be key priorities demanded by the major political and financial backers of the Democratic Party.

In other words, in a number of key areas, an Obama administration would echo the policies of both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton." *

Yet, symbols are powerful things. Sometimes, they have a life all their own. They may come to mean something more than first intended.

History has been made.

We shall see exactly what kind of history it will be.

--(c) '08 maj

{Source: Lusane, C., " 'We Must Lead the World' : The Obama Doctrine and the Rebranding of U.S. Hegemony, " The Black Scholar, [v.38: n.1] (Spr. '08), p.3.}

No More Stolen Elections!




Democracy Activists call for UN Election Observers
October 30, 2008
Español:
http://nomorestolenelections.org/un_espanol.php
Francais:
http://nomorestolenelections.org/un_francais.php

(Washington D.C.) — A coalition of U.S. pro-democracy organizations today petitioned the members of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations for international election observers for the upcoming U.S. presidential election. Coalition representatives today visited the U.S. Embassies of ECOSOC member nations New Zealand, Brazil, Uruguay, Bolivia, France, United Kingdom, and Sweden, and plan to visit ECOSOC offices in New York City tomorrow to request election observers to document violations of American voting rights, to guarantee the election results are tabulated accurately, and to bring the force of international law to the United States to guarantee the human rights of American citizens. They submitted the petition now, they said, in order to place their request on record ahead of the coming Election Day.

“The international community came to the aid of past American movements for civil rights, free speech, and independence. We are asking for the same support today. U.S. elections remain undemocratic and rife with voting rights violations, and international election observers are needed.” said Ben Manski, executive director of the pro-democracy group, Liberty Tree.

The petition points to international covenants, conventions and the Declaration for Human Rights itself as a basis for supporting the right of U.S. citizens to freely choose their president and their right to seek international assistance. The petition points to an often overlooked history of voting rights violations that culminated in the challenged U.S. Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004. Many of these voting rights violations were clearly racially based and directly contravene the U.S.’s signature on the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination.

The attention paid to election problems in the 2004 election was both more extensive and more pre-emptive than in 2000 which increased awareness and helped fuel important election law changes. However, the more flagrant bias in the role of the federal government in election law enforcement priorities and what appears to be continued refinement and condoning of election fraud and voter suppression have probably worsened the situation.

“If nothing else, they must document and expose to the rest of the world – that we cannot guarantee our voting rights, nor even enough integrity in our complicated and partisan system that the 2008 Presidential Election will have integrity, integrity which both the elections of 2000 and 2004 clearly lacked,” states Grace Ross, 2006 Massachusetts Gubernatorial Candidate and long-time human rights activist, who spearheaded a request for UN election observers before the 2004 Presidential Elections.

Kevin Zeese of TrueVote warns that “Problems with voting and registration of voters are being reported in many parts of the United States. We have had two questionable and problem-ridden presidential elections in 2000 and 2004. Americans are losing faith in their democracy and international observers are needed to provide an independent, official review of what is occurring.”

Grace Ross explains: “Hundreds of US based organizations have participated in exposing what happened in 2000 and 2004, sued various bodies of government, fought for legislative remedies, have monitored election changes since and are now organizing extensively to educate voters and put various local protections in place as best they can.”

“Suppose the upcoming processes are as tainted as the last ones?” concluded Ms. Ross, “Many fought for domestic solutions last time, all of those attempts failed – and we are no closer to protecting our voting rights this time. Where then can we turn except to ask the international community to stop these human rights violations in the U.S.?”


Ben Manski of www.NoMoreStolenElections.org
Kevin Zeese of www.TrueVote.US
Grace Ross of www.econhumanrights.org
Dr. Margaret Flowers and Diane Wittner of www.ChesapeakeCitizens.org
Medea Benjamin of www.GlobalExchange.org (NGO with United Nations consultative status)