posted July 17, 2004 04:37 PM              

WE ARE THE REPUBLICANS

By Mick Youther

One thing we learned from the 2000 election is that our voting system is a mess. Have things gotten any better? The government seems to think that the answer to all our voting problems is paperless electronic voting machines, and it is using our tax dollars to entice states to buy these new machines. So far, things are not looking too good.

* [In Boone County, Ind.], an electronic system initially recorded more than 144,000 votes in an election with fewer than 19,000 registered voters--NY Times, 1/31/04

* In the 2002 election, brand new computer voting systems used in Florida lost over 100,000 votes due to a software error. Errors and irregularities were also reported in New Jersey, Missouri, Georgia, Texas, and at least 10 other states.-- Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), press release, January, 2003

* Incorrect software programming has now been identified in over 100 elections, often flipping the race to the wrong candidate, even when the election was not close. No one knows how many elections have actually been misprogrammed, and as we eliminate paper ballots, no one will ever know --Bev Harris, author of Black Box Voting: Ballot-Tampering in the 21st Century, BuzzFlash Interview, 10/1/03

Electronic voting machines breaking down or making random mistakes is bad enough, but there is something even more ominous about this rush to paperless, electronic voting.

*There is a long history of election irregularities that suggests that vote fraud using voting machines has been occurring. Republicans appear to be the main beneficiaries. In the 2002 election 74% of upset elections went to Republicans by as much as 9-14% outside of the margin of error, according to reporter Alastair Thompson of Scoop.-- The Baltimore Chronicle, 8/15/03

* It appears that voting technology is a topic that the Republican leadership wants to tightly control. It is without doubt that Republicans own most of the companies that manufacture, sell, and service voting machines. And President Bush and the Republican Congress appear determined to control and limit oversight of the elections industry. -- Lynn Landes, dissidentvoice.org, 4/13/04

* in 2004, most votes will be 'counted' by paperless, unverifiable, eminently hackable computer systems, privately owned and secretly programmed by Bush supporters from the Religious Right and the military-intelligence complex.-- Chris Floyd, Moscow Times, 9/12/03

* The 2004 election rests in the private hands of the Urosevich brothers [Bob and Todd], who are financed by the far-out right wing and top donors to the Republican Party.--Lynn Landes, EcoTalk.org, 4/27/04 (Their companies, Diebold and ES&S, will count about 80% of all votes cast in the upcoming U.S. presidential election.)

* The voting industry is spending literally millions of dollars, and going through amazing feats of contorted logic that can best be described as marketing gymnastics, to convince us that we should discontinue proper auditing. They want us to eliminate the ballot which you verify, and trust the secret system instead.-- Bev Harris, author of Black Box Voting: Ballot-Tampering in the 21st Century, BuzzFlash Interview, 10/1/03

* Using these machines is tantamount to handing complete control of vote counting to a private company, with no independent checks or audits. These machines represent a serious threat to democracy.-- Professor David Dill, Stanford University, [infernalpress.com], 6/20/03

Would Republicans really stoop to rigging voting machines to win? Judging from what they did in Florida's 2000 election, the answer is yes Absolutely. The Republicans learned that, no matter how many laws and rules they have to break to win an election, once they've won, it's all over but the crying. Nobody will do anything about it. President Bush is their proof of that.

There are Democratic bills in Congress trying to assure a verifiable election, but they are being held up by you-know-who. Let your Congressperson know what you think about casting your vote on Republican machines with no verifiable record, and visit these sites to see what else you can do to assure a fair election.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation

Verified Voting

Working for Change

Black Box Voting

Here are the links to the sites above....very good sites!
http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2821 http://www.verifiedvoting.org/ http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/petition.cfm?itemid=14993 http://www.blackboxvoting.org/cleanvote.html

Retrofitting paperless machines with printers is expensive and would probably cause more problems than it solves; but there is already a simple solution to our problem;hand-marked paper ballots counted by human beings. It has been found to be the most accurate system available (MIT study--Voting Technology and Uncounted Votes in the United States, 9/25/02), and it could easily be adopted by every precinct in the United States in time for the November election.

Do you want it fast, or do you want it right? This may be our last chance to get it right.

Posted July 11, 2004

Mick Youther is retired and lives in beautiful Southern Illinois. You can email your comments to Mick@interventionmag.com

posted July 18, 2004 04:32 AM              

How many Voter does it take to change a light blub?

Voters can't change anything...

So weather you vote republican or Democrate. Both canidates SUCK!

posted July 18, 2004 10:00 PM              

Look who's calling the kettle black?

Ms. redundancy, herself! (Queen of the broken record syndrome!)

People who live in glass houses, should not throw stones, Isis. So get over it, already!

posted July 19, 2004 12:03 AM              

Those who have differing opinions from your own get nothing but defensiveness and sarcasm from you, in my observation.

That's not the way to have your message heard. It makes you seem rather closed minded, and therefore, not worth the effort.

posted July 19, 2004 01:09 AM            

Good try w/ the diversionary tactic, but alas no cigar.

I may be a lot of things, but I don't b@tch about the same stuff over and over and over and over and over and over and over...

posted July 19, 2004 02:12 PM            

However in line with liberal tactics, you can allege whatever you like without having to back it up I suppose, it is the liberal MO after all.

posted July 19, 2004 04:55 PM              

quote:

---

Rainbow, you are one of the most hostile posters in here. (imo)
Those who have differing opinions from your own get nothing but defensiveness and sarcasm from you, in my observation.

---

Ya know I always thought that what was sauce for the goose, was sauce for the gander, but that doesn't seem to apply here.

Has anyone ever noticed that I get defensiveness, and sarcasm, from those whose opinions are different from mine???

posted July 19, 2004 05:00 PM              

Now gimme a hug!

posted July 19, 2004 05:23 PM              

quote:

---

Has anyone ever noticed that I get defensiveness, and sarcasm, from those whose opinions are different from mine???

---

No, actually. MOST posters in here are generally civilized toward you. You, on the other hand, are generally pi$$y toward ALL of them, except those who give you Kudos and high-fives. (which, people on the left seem to love doing around here ~ like it's a contest or something )

posted July 19, 2004 07:02 PM              

quote:

---

No, actually. MOST posters in here are generally civilized toward you. You, on the other hand, are generally pi$$y toward ALL of them, except those who give you Kudos and high-fives. (which, people on the left seem to love doing around here ~ like it's a contest or something )

---

What a crock!

MOST POSTERS AROUND HERE ARE GENERALLY CIVILIZED TOWARD ME?

You can actually say that with a straight face???

posted July 19, 2004 07:15 PM            

Oh, and didn't anyone ever teach you two wrongs don't make a right - if you were civil and everyone were just mean to you, it would become very apparent who is in the wrong - when we allow ourselves to be drawn down to petty behavior, justified by "they did it first", it makes us no better than them (and I'm speaking of everyone who allows themselves to get defensive and petty, incl. myself sometimes)...

posted July 19, 2004 07:44 PM            

And Rainbow, I wasn't attacking you ALL THE TIME...It wasn't until you started to get rude, slanderous and downright ugly with anyone that didn't agree with you. It was as though being conservative meant open season from you.

Well, at some point we get tired of it. Especially since 90% of those on the left will still be civil to us in other forums or even here by acknowledging our side - even if they totally disagree.

posted July 19, 2004 07:56 PM              

quote:

---

you will be petty and nasty just in response to an article, or an opinion, irrespective of what it personally has to do with you - ie; it can say absolutely nothing about you, no reference to you, etc, and you will STILL come back w/ the same attitude.

---

If an article or opinion makes fun of, or slams what I stand for, I may have an attitude, yes. I'll admit it. I haven't reached that level of spiritual growth yet, where I can sit back and see what I consider to be untruths, just go unchallenged!

No one here does! Why am I always singled out?

another quote:

quote:

---

.. when we allow ourselves to be drawn down to petty behavior, justified by "they did it first", it makes us no better than them (and I'm speaking of everyone who allows themselves to get defensive and petty, incl. myself sometimes)...

---

Quite true!

And I hang my head in shame...

posted July 19, 2004 08:02 PM              

...didn't realize I was being so hateful...

...actually, I was going back on some of the threads here and found a quite "civil" conversation between you and me....it was in reference to the Hopi woman who was killed in the war...

With love,
The Empress...

posted July 19, 2004 11:14 PM            

quote:

---

That is why it is so important to try to find some sort of inner peace, some lack of conflict within our own selves. I read somewhere that we can not be truly at peace with ourselves if we are at variance with others

---

How aptly put

juniperb

posted July 19, 2004 11:32 PM              

Nevertheless, just to prove myself innocent of Red Commie leanings, here is exhibit #1,#2, and #3

"you are venemous and snide"
"you will be petty and nasty"
"you are like a broken record"
Dunno. Sounds like b!tching to me. I mean that's what I sound like when I'm
b!tchin'
And that's just one thread!

posted July 20, 2004 12:43 AM            

I can only speak for myself, but while I do consider the word 'liberal' to be an epithet, I don't necessarily mean that I believe that individual is a 'commie' - there are variations of liberals.

I suppose bitching is a relative term - however you cannot use yourself as the benchmark for what constitutes, say, bitching.

My first point was valid, in spite of your ignoring it - I do not start threads 'complaining' (read: bitching) about the same stuff over and over (per my point above) - and I do not reply to every single post with the same mantra time and time again - as Rain does. You know it. Most everyone here knows it. She says the same damn things all the time - it varies little (in GU anyway). This isn't about comments in one thread, but rather the majority of her posts in any thread related to a handful of issues - namely GWB, and anything having to do remotely with him.

You can latch onto whatever weak point you think you have and we can keep going if you like...I'm bored this evening and have a bit of time.

posted July 20, 2004 01:50 AM              

quote:

---

"you are venemous and snide"
"you will be petty and nasty"
"you are like a broken record"

---

Yup Tink! Those were directed at me alright....

...and not only that, but Pid said that I was "bitter" "angry" "rude" "slanderous" and "downright ugly!"

I was also called "hostile" and "a hypocrite," and "pi$$y."

(and I could probably find more, if I made a thorough search)

Ya know? that could kinda give a girl a complex!