State Senator Eric Oemig used a famous quote from Stalin to illustrate his proposals to make Washington elections more vulnerable to fraud. (Though that is, not, of course, how he explains his legislation.) David Postman caught the odd use of Stalin, and Stefan Sharkansky explained why the use of LBJ was also strange.
Perhaps this is piling on, but I have to add just one more point, since I often see this mistake. Stalin probably did not say: "It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes." Here's a discussion of the question at Urban Legends, with this conclusion: "The quoted passage is frequently attributed to "our boy" Stalin, but I have yet to find a citation confirming he ever actually said such a thing."
Since we don't have complete recordings of everything that Stalin said, we can't be absolutely certain that he didn't say it, but it is unlikely that he did.
(By the way, it is good to learn that Senator Oemig knows about Sound Politics. I hope that he will read the posts here carefully, since I think that he may learn something, from time to time.
And I will go a bit farther and say that I also hope that he will read my site from time to time, since I often discuss vote fraud there. For example, here's my brief post on Wisconsin's same day registration law, which has done so much to increase vote fraud in that state, especially in Democratically-controlled Milwaukee.)
Posted by Jim Miller at January 20, 2007 10:47 AM | Email ThisThanks for the post.
Posted by: Michele on January 20, 2007 11:04 AMThese people really DO respect the man, and he really IS one of their heroes.
In short, what David and thousands of others actually think was "strange," was not, in fact, unusual for the democratic centralists; who prove time and again that they do not want our input on what they do; who do not want us to have a voice when that voice may interfere with their agenda; a group that believes us to be too stupid, too easy to manipulate (Can you say.... Gas Tax?) and who really, really do believe in many of Stalin's tenets of government.
Posted by: Hinton on January 20, 2007 11:41 AM(And I don't know how I made it, since I did check the spelling, twice.)
Posted by: Jim Miller on January 20, 2007 12:19 PMWe have LBJ to thank for the "war on poverty" that massive government dependency program that has largely resulted in the destruction of the family.
It's ironic though, because I remember back in the '60's the left hated LBJ because of his Vietnam War policies. The left not only has Bush Derangement Syndrome, they apparently also have Selective Memory Syndrome.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on January 20, 2007 01:08 PM1. I agree with you about the destruction of the family.
2. I am an independent and not a party person, but I am sounding the alarm. Hillary will be the next President unless the parties can run some viable candidates against her. Mc Cain or Rudy will not be the nominee of the pubbies. Mc Cann hopefully will not run as a 3rd party candidate.
3. My issues are education and the elimination of a permanent victim class. Hillary will not help these issues. By the way, for those readers of the Brit papers, Cherie Blair says that it is her constitutional right under the EU Bill of Rights to receive cut-rate designer clothes and other perks. Limo-libs are the same throughout the world.
4. No matter whether one is a party person or indie, like me, they should have an interest in fair and corruption free elections.
Posted by: WVH on January 20, 2007 04:13 PMOne term and out? Haha, you silly twit, he won with 55 percent of the vote against Stefan's hero Toby Nixon, in a district that Nixon had carried twice before, a district that once elected Kathy Lambert and the never-to-be-forgotten Bill (Spanky) Backlund.
FIFTY-FIVE PERCENT! Now who are you going to beat him with? You and what army of mouth-breathers?
I swear, watching you losers thrash around wildly is the best entertainment on the Net these days.
Posted by: ivan on January 21, 2007 10:45 AM1. Is fraud OK?
2. Do we want an election system that is corrupt?
3. Are the proposed reforms more likely to introduce corruption?
4. I have more faith in the ability of low income persons and persons of color to excercise the franchise than the handlers who only want them to vote a certain way and preserve the permanent underclass.
5. Should non US citizens be allowed to vote?
The system that worked so well in Chicago, Philly, and Boston is really what folks like Ivan want here. Vote early and often.
At least, I won't have to move to Chicago to continue participating in elections after I'm dead.
Posted by: WVH on January 21, 2007 12:01 PMYou are probably right about the dem's keeping control, with exactly the same type of legislation they are shoving down our throats.
Keep the voter fraud within the system, and King County will always have a Dem win.
It's part of the Corrupt world you live in Ivan, which you accept at normal, and even believe it yourself.
I myself look beyond the party line, and hope someday, that REAL people will overcome this Social Injustice, you call leadership in this state.
Posted by: Chris on January 21, 2007 02:24 PMSen. Oemig received 52.9 percent of the vote, not 55.
Posted by: Dan on January 21, 2007 09:26 PM