F*ck the supposed "will of the american people"

So the kkkonservatives* are howling themselves silly over Kerry's refusal to concede. Why should Kerry concede? Surely the kkkonservatives* can't be inferring "will" from the popular vote (c.f. Election 2000). And I'd be willing to bet my life savings that if the situation in Ohio was reversed, with Kerry ahead by less than 5% that the New York Times headline would be "Kerry is 'convinced' of win; White House Reluctant to Concede Tight Race" with some White House talking head talking about how Bush has the popular vote (no doubt the same talking head that claimed we should follow the political process of the electoral college). In 2000, Bush was ahead by less than 1,000 votes in Florida when his brother's and lackeys headed off a recount (which Gore would have won). I'm going to head off and make a blue t-shirt that reads: Recount 2000, didn't happen. Recount 2004, had better. (Bush is running out of brothers). But one wonders where in the world Bush managed to carry Florida by 400,000 votes, I'm waiting for an analysis of that situation. Just a reminder, according to the Guardian apparently only 3% of the 93,000 names that were removed from the Florida registered voter rolls were illegal voters.

*the reason why I am using kkkonservative as a term is because I'm pissed and I'm currently in the process of trying to come up with a term to describe the kkkonservatives that they themselves don't use. I don't want to use a term to describe them that only results in their belief that they are accurately reflected in the term. i.e. I don't want to always be using their terms to engage in political discussion anymore because the debate as always stacked in their favor when you do). The key, [Lakoff] says, is not to shift rightward politically, but to lift a few moves from the right’s linguistic playbook. Lakoff is trying to teach liberals what conservatives have known for years: the skill of defining, or “framing,” issues in a way that makes it next to impossible for the other side to contradict you. By consciously and cleverly framing the terms used in the debate, you define the debate itself. “Clear Skies” and “partial-birth abortion” aren’t just catchphrases; they’re brilliantly self-contained arguments. And if you need any further proof that liberals are losing the frame game, consider that many won’t even call themselves “liberal,” preferring the (as-yet) unsullied tag “progressive.” I don't think it's accurate or fair, but I don't think contemporary American politics is about either (which is a problem that needs to be addressed in another post).