Immediately following the sea-change election of 2006, I posted a diary expressing my anger and frustration.  Yes, I was elated that the party of progressive policies for the people had taken back both houses of congress.  But there was an anger -- an anger that we as a politic body continue to allow our electoral treason to be treated as a game with no rules, no referees and no respect for the sacrifices made by thousands to protect our right to vote.

The other side has us beat hands down on psychological use of words when enacting legislation.  No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, etc.  Yes, words do matter.  At that time I proposed an act to protect the integrity of our electoral system.  I suggested it be called the Electoral Treason Act.  I was told that the time was not right, we should be celebrating.  Now the time is right.  Below the fold I re-present my diary from almost two years ago.

We had an interesting situation come up in a softball game this weekend.

I'll set out the facts, then you get your turn to be the umpire and decide what should be done.

You think I'm kidding.  I'm not.

You only stopped here because it doesn't sound like a candidate diary.  It's not.

You might have guessed I'm tired of the primaries and anxious to move on to electing Obama.  I am.

You might have guessed that I'm looking past the primaries and past the general election to January 2009.  I am.

Obama is where he is today for any number of reasons.

He is the Democratic front-runner because he is capable, intelligent, charismatic, and well-grounded with solid judgment.  And because he will make a damned fine president.  

He will become the Democratic nominee because he is a better candidate with a better ground game and a 50-state strategy.  

I really would prefer John Edwards as the next president, and I'll admit it.  But I am a realist, and John Edwards is no longer an option.  I lean towards my second choice, but I don't recall ever even mentioning it publicly because, frankly, I was never quite convinced and I had the attitude that I would be pleased with either of our two remaining contenders.

Okay, I have to admit I got the idea from listening to Tweety (a/k/a Chris Matthews, for those who - like me - get irritated by the tendency to use nicknames and acronyms that are designed solely to tell people, "I'm part of the in crowd that knows who and what we're talking about and you're not.")

As Tweety was bloviating about something or other (and who really listens?), I heard him refer to John McCain's campaign and say, "Stay the course."

I have pondered whether to put this in writing.  Some culture, somewhere probably has a taboo against putting bad things in writing, lest they come true.

But I had a nightmare last night, and it was so gawd-awful that I feel compelled to share it.  Please do not trash me for the content; I am comfortable with either of our candidates and have only a slight preference for one over the other.  This diary is not meant to be a candidate diary, and is not meant to trash the other candidate (which seems  to have become the definition of a candidate diary as BiPM so amusingly put it today).  

Today I think a rant is in order.  Not a candidate diary; not even a political diary.  Sure, there is the daily frustration of being represented by Don Young, Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens.  There is the daily frustration of seeing calls to action, like on the FISA fight.  "Call your senator!"  "Yeah, right, I'll get right on that.  I'm sure I can change Ted Stevens' mind."

But this is not about that.  This is, to the best I can reconstruct it, a verbatim transcript of a phone conversation I had today.  You may consider it just odd.  Perhaps you may even read it and think I was just being a dick to some poor schmuck who is only doing her job and probably not getting paid enough.  But we have to put up with this nonsense routinely, and I have to tell you it starts to get annoying.

If I haven't scared you off yet, follow me for the details.

No, I am not kidding.  

Well, let me be clear.  I am not kidding that there is at least one "scientist" out there who apparently truly believes in the pre-Copernicus geocentric theory of the universe, i.e., that the earth is the center of the universe and everything revolves around the earth.  Don't believe me?  Take the jump.

This diary is directed to those of you who are working for or supporting one candidate or the other.  What I'd really like to say is, "STFU!"  But, of course, I don't really mean that.  What I mean is, "Please don't be like the traditional media and the beltway pundits and the campaign press directors.  Give us some honesty.  To do that, sometimes you have to question your own motives.  In other words, be honest with yourself.

I'm not your target audience.  Let's face it.  I live in freakin' Alaska.  By the time we get a voice on the party nominee, it's a done deal.  My vote isn't worth an extra minute of sunshine in a Barrow summer.  When it comes to November, my vote is just as meaningless.  The glaciers will have all melted before Alaska's three votes go to a Democrat.  

Okay, I should have put that title in quotations.  It is the argument of the morally bankrupt administration and its vapid cheerleaders.

As for me, the issue is not only clear, but it was decided for once and for all almost 50 years ago by the adoption of the Geneva Conventions.  

So what is the point of this diary?  I want to apply my natural suspsicion to a story I heard last night watching that fake news channel to, I hope, thoroughly disabuse anyone of the notion that "We have to torture prisoners."

Well, I cannot say that my grandfather did anything earth-shaking 50 years ago.  But a friend of mine's grandfather did.

In 1957, Ronald Davies was a federal judge in Fargo, serving on the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota.  Many easterners would consider it a sleepy, backwater assignment only fitting for a son of the prairies.  

Join me in taking the following pledge:

Whereas:  The party I have faithfully supported for over 40 years now controls both houses of congress; and
Whereas:  It is completely within the power of Congress to end the protracted occupation of Iraq and bring our sons and daughters and sisters and brothers and fathers and mothers safely home; and
Whereas:  The desire to end this occupation is shared by an overwhelming majority of Americans;
Therefore:  If American troops are not withdrawn from Iraq by November 1, 2008, I hereby pledge that I will refrain from voting in the election that follows.

Feel free to join me in taking this pledge.  

To Mitt Romney's niece:

First, I want to thank your family for the service your husband has offered to the country, and for the sacrifice that means for you and any children you may have.

Your uncle recently used your situation as an example of differing ways we all can support the war effort without actually serving.  One example he cited was his own son, who is supporting the war effort by driving a Winnebago around Iowa trying to get Mitt elected president.  I have been to Iowa.  I can understand how someone from the privileged class could think that is on a par with the hell that is war.

His other example was the sacrifice by your neighbors.  He said that your husband is in the National Guard.  He said that shortly after you purchased a new home, your husband was called up to service overseas.  He said that the restrictive covenants in your subdivision or homeowners' association rules require all new homes to be landscaped within one year or the homeowner faces fines.  He said that the day before the year was up, you woke up to the sound of your neighbors laying sod and planting trees.

There are a few things President Numbnutz said in the State of the Union address that I wholeheartedly concur with.  I will get to those in a moment.  But first I would like to point out the error in all his excuses for the failure in the occupation and escalation in Iraq.  

When in the course of events, a country is forced to go to war to protect its national interests, it is an obvious imperative that the country as a whole has to accept the premise for the war and rally around the effort.  Anything else will almost certainly lead to failure, as history has shown for thousands of years.  If there is, as President Numbnutz claims, a compelling need to continue to occupy Iraq, then it is the duty of the leadership to ensure that the masses see that compelling need.  

Subtitled:  Looking past the first 100 hours.

The new congress should give serious thought to saving social security by cutting the payroll tax rate, thereby offering relief to the poor, the middle-class, and small businesses.  Does this sound like "voodoo economics"?  Well, I've left out a step, but let me explain below the fold.

How will the "pay as you go" resolution affect the proposed escalation of hostilities in Iraq?  If this resolution applies to "off-budget" items -- you know, little unanticipated things like invasions, occupations and escalations -- it was a sheer stroke of genius by the House leadership.

Now the good guys can sit back and say, "You want an escalation?  Fine, but that bumps up against our new rule.  How much extra will it cost?  Where are you going to find the money for it?  You want it, you propose a tax increase to pay for it!  We'll be more than happy to put your name first as the prime sponsor on the bill to raise taxes to pay for your folly."  Does anybody know if PAYGO applies to a proposed escalation?

Bush continues to insist that we will not leave Iraq until the job is finished and "victry" is won.  He refuses to define "victry."  He will not tell us what needs to happen for us to declare the job is done.  Allow me to peek inside his head and offer a definition.