READER COMMENTS ON
"Conyers Won't Quit!"
(11 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 1:41 pm PT...
Blackwell may very well continue to arrogantly ignore any such offerings, regardless of how reasonable they are. Therefore, we must continue to press our own envelope just as hard.
I just regenerated a modified CITIZEN NATIONAL ELECTION REFORM PETITION as a new topic under ELECTION REFORM DISCUSSION at the VR site (Velvet Revolution/Voter Revolution)! Again, just as a proposed sample to get us talking about how to unify and coordinate our election reform efforts!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 1/13/2005 @ 5:09 pm PT...
It should be borne in mind that this man is actually running for governor of Ohio...a man who won't even respond professionally to a polite request from a member of Congress.
The mind boggles at what the Republican Party in that backward state is thinking to even consider this character for its next governor. Never mind his ethical conflicts; he's certifiably stupid to imagine he could write a letter congratulating himself for winning the state for Bush while at the same time being challenged in court. Truly unbelievable.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 5:23 pm PT...
Blackwell is giving Ohio counties the choice of purchasing one of two optical scanners only for their elections: Republican-owned Diebold machines or Republican-owned ES&S machines - pardon me while I puke. And Peter King, Rep. N.Y. says "we'll take care of the counting". Better stop those machines, one way or another.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 5:30 pm PT...
Brad, you mentioned briefly about how Secretaries of State will be gathering to discuss their roles as state election overseers.
It seems that if you fail to hold the party line and "deliver" the election to your party, you are no longer fit to hold the position. See attached link about how Sam Reed (R) is no longer fit for the office, since his "mismanagement" allowed a Democrat to "steal" the governor's race.
In other news, you have no idea how obnoxious these Republican "Revote Washington" commericals are... the blaring siren sounds surprisingly like an air raid alarm.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 5:55 pm PT...
Robert Lockwood Mills - thank you for saying that - my sentiments exactly!
Blackwell's letter was meant as an announcement to Bush. "See, see, see what I did for you, I've stuck my whole head up your butt!" (Sorry - but not really:), at any rate, he must appear equally as arrogant - and stupid.
I wouldn't think the SOS's should meet to discuss. It's a damn clear conflict of interest that I'm personally fed up with recognizing. Which SOS discussing the issue isn't going to have a conflict of interest agenda - that's the problem!!!!
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 6:44 pm PT...
The Secretary of State holding both positions is certainly a conflict of interest and one that must be abolished if there is to be any confidence in elections. Look what Katherine Harris did in 2002 to Florida, (deliberatly opening her office on Sunday just to cut short the vote counting time) among other nasty "little" tricks. How can it not be a conflict of interest that puts too much power and oportunity in their greedy, ambitious hands. She was rewarded handsomly for her efforts. This is a very important issue to deal with before the next election.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 8:22 pm PT...
The sample election reform petition I drafted at VR addresses the issue of election officials particiapting in campaigns by calling for its prohibition by law. A senator is also proposing legislation to that effect.
The fact that Blackwell is also giving Ohio counties a choice between two Republican voting machine companies means business as usual. I'm sure there's no incentive to correct problems in Ohio when he's looking to exploit them for his own personal election. Just as there is zero incentive for a Republican controlled Congress to support or advocate election reform that will cost them elections.
Sooooooooo! Looks like a battle is brewing somewhere down the line. It just can't go on like this and I hope they understand that?
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 9:54 pm PT...
I found this paragraph extremely chilling:
The public must be assured "that we are not participating in any type of manipulation at that level," said Rebecca Vigil-Giron, New Mexico's secretary of state and president of the national group.
... because it reminds me of this paragraph, which was written by Nicholas DeB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General of the United States, three days after the assassination of President Kennedy ...
The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.
Need I spell out the parallel? They are both saying:
The public must be convinced of what we want them to believe, regardless of whether it be true or false.
How could Katzenbach know that Oswald was the assassin, that he had no confederates who were still at large, and so on, just three days after the event? And how could Rebecca Vigil-Giron know "that we are not participating in any type of manipulation at that level"?
He couldn't. She couldn't either. And neither of them even came close to suggesting that we need to find out what happened. This is all PR --- the public must be convinced!
As if the public is the real problem, rather than the crimes.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 1/13/2005 @ 11:15 pm PT...
" ... What Blackwell meant, Lee asserted, was that the current electronic voting machines were not certified under new laws passed by the state assembly which require voter-verified paper trails.
'Under the new law for voting machines that will be used in 2006 those electronic voting machines will have to be equipped with voter verified paper trails,' he said. ..."
So ... are we to hope that Ohio 2006 will be an accountable election?
Poor Blackwell (*not*) ... set up by the current powers that be just to assure W's election then cast away to sink or swim on his own.
So goes when you sell your soul for those fifteen minutes of fame.
Regardless of what is planned for 2006 and beyond I hope Conyers nails them.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 1/14/2005 @ 7:48 am PT...
The term "PR" has taken on new meaning. Does it more meaningfully refer to "Image Management" or "Public Ruse" ?
Meanwhile, the statement "...we are not participating in any type of manipulation at that level," leads me to ask, Then exactly what level IS the manipulation occuring?
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 1/14/2005 @ 8:53 pm PT...
No kidding, Miss P. (#10)
I probably shouldn't have said "PR". That's an old and rusty concept. PM is the big idea now. It stands for "Perception Management". It's a powerful tool, especially if you don't understand what it is, and if you don't realize that it's being used against you. Please read this excellent article by Robert Parry for more details.
As for the statement you quoted, if I were sufficiently cynical I would say it means the same as: "We are participating in all types of manipulation at every other level."