(NOTE: Blogged by Brad on the road from the National Election Reform Conference in Nashville)
After many months and many requests and many challenges from both critics and Mainstream Media types, The St. Petersburg Times is reporting — and The BRAD BLOG can confirm — that Clint Curtis took a polygraph test on March 3rd…and passed!
The lie-detector test, administered to Curtis by Tim Robinson, the retired chief polygraph operator for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, found that the Florida whistleblowing software designer who has charged in a sworn affidavit that he was asked by U.S. Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) to create an electronic vote-rigging software prototype in 2000, was indeed found to be truthful in all of his responses!
Curtis’ allegations in early December of 2004 when Curtis filed a sworn affidavit which was then followed up several weeks later with sworn testimony under oath to members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. (Video of that testimony is here.)
The article which breaks the news of Curtis’ polygraph test was written by Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter and Times Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Lucy Morgan.
Despite her impressive credentials, the month-long exclusive access to Curtis’ test-results that Morgan was given, and the full cooperation of The BRAD BLOG along with our months of reporting and materials acquired during our continuing investigation, she still managed to publish a number of errors and more than a few key omissions.
As well, in the name of “balance” (the phoney-baloney concept invented by charlatans to give themselves a chance they don’t deserve), Morgan manages to use several derisive quotes from Feeney, but not a single quote from Curtis.
Granted, the story of this entire sordid affair is a broad one, stretching back at least 4 years with a miles-long paper trail to accompany it. Still, we’d expect a bit more responsibility from a Pulitzer Prize winner. Especially one who has had so much time to work on the story, gather information for it, and enjoy full and unfettered access for interviews with all of the key participants in the story.
We knew there was trouble afoot from the first beat as the story was headlined “Blogs Spin Tale of Conspiracy, Computers”. Which prompts us to wonder what headline The Times might have used when covering Woodward and Bernstein’s series of Watergate articles in 1972: “Washington Post Spins Tale of Conspiracy, Cover-up”?
We’re currently at the National Election Reform Conference in Nashville (where folks have been incredibly supportive, including Election Reform All-Stars such as Green Party Candidate David Cobb and Free Press writer/editor and attorney Bob Fritrakis, and the delightful Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney! All have had nothing but tremendous things to say about BRAD BLOG and VELVET REVOLUTION — and on video tape at that!)Though it makes it difficult for now to respond in full to the errors and omissions in Morgan’s story. Or even to get her responses to them.
We will do so — with an update — at the first available opportunity. Given what’s going on out here, it may be a day or so…we’ll see…
…CONTACTS…(Please be clear, but always polite!)
Send an Email to Lucy Morgan, Paul Tash (President/Editor of SP Times) and the Corrections Desk.
Send a Letter to the Editor.
UPDATE 4/11/05:Lucy Morgan responds, and so does BRAD BLOG, in detail, in a follow-up reponse to Morgan’s unfortunate article.
The Clint Curtis/Tom Feeney/Yang Enterprises Vote-Rigging Scandal series, please see:
– A Quick Summary of the story so far. –
– An Index of all the Key Articles & Evidence in the series so far.
excellent! keep us posted, Brad!
For heaven’s sake.
Woo-hoo!!!
Thank God. That’s wonderful news, Brad. Keep up the pressure…
Wonderful Brad Thanks for the update!
Imagine that.
Seymour Hersh perhaps? I can only hope. The anticipation is killing me.
Hersh is The New Yorker, but wouldn’t it be nice! Followed, of course, by interviews on all the networks. And Brad and Clint would have to be included too, and…..
whooo hoooo
*bfg*
The anticipation is killing me. Hurry, hurry, hurry… (thanks)
This is good news! The walls are closing in!
Major American Newspaper?
NY Times?
Washington Post?
I’ve got it…The Wall Street Jour……Nevermind.
Whichever paper it is, be prepared for the Rupert Murdoch owned media to lash back. They’ll go full force on the lies trying to discredit all of Brad’s good work. Let’s keep our heads above water.
Good news nonetheless.
Cheer! Keep us posted!
VOTERGATE anyone?
Coooll!!!! 😀
Wonderful! I’ll bet it’s Seymour Hersh; if so, that’s great news for several reasons. He’s a great reporter with credibility among his peers, he checks his facts copiously, and he’s unafraid of the Bush machine.
Thank you for your diligence! Truth might have a chance. by the way…has anyone heard of THIS "story"?
http://www.intl-news.com/module...&sid=1397
I’ll hazard a guess that we find out who at FDOT was so kind to call the GA police and ask (command?) them to close the recently re-opened Lemme murder case.
Having worked in Florida government for the last 15 years – none of this surprises me…..
The "major new element" in the Clint Curtis story has my interest fine tuned … way cool.
Here’s the story from Lucy Morgan, St. Petersburg Times: Blogs spin tale of computers, conspiracies
Great news!! Some how I feel the MSM will pick up and act like this is a recent revelation when all along we know the pot has been simmering for some time! Brad, you do a great job and I don’t mind donating to the cause! Keep on keeping on!!
It will be interesting to see how big-city papers play up an "interesting new angle to the Clint Curtis story" when they’ve never covered the old angles.
It’s mind-boggling, really. A prominent Florida state legislator, Feeney, a former running mate of the existing governor (the presiden’t brother) is accused in a sworn affidavit by Curtis of election fraud that might well have been decisive in the 2000 presidential election. Two years later the same man, having been the subject of an ethics inquiry in his home state, is elected to Congress.
Eight months after that, the man investigating wrongdoing in the same agency that was the center of the ethics inquiry against Feeney is found dead, an alleged suicide, and when the police reopen an investigation in response to questions, someone in the same agency he was investigating persuades the police to abort the reopened investigation, and immediately everyone shuts up about it.
That did not happen in the Philippines, or in Uzbekhistan. It happened in the United States of America. But readers of the New York Times and Washington Post don’t have a clue about it.
Bill #22 Lets hope that is not the article that Brad was talking about.
It seems a bit slanted toward the Yang side in the sense that it seriously waters down many of the facts.
Re: Bill, #22 —
That article reads like government sponsored propaganda, the timing of which is released to counter the real truth. $10.00 says it is government propaganda!
I feel sorry for the citizens of Florida who have no alternative access to the real news. Is there a single Florida newspaper who dares print the truth?
RLM #24 I don’t think Curtis has said the software "might well have been decisive in the 2000 presidential election".
The program he worked on was a touch screen operation and those type machines were not used in the 2000 election in Florida.
I think the implication is, even tho Curtis did not say it in his affadavit, that it was something in the works for future elections … not just the presidential one either.
But you raise an interesting question about whether touch screen machines were used in other states outside Florida for the 2000 election.
Re: The Lucy Morgan article in the St. Petersburg Times
She won a Pulitzer. How depressing.
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0771282.html
Great job Brad,
I hope this breaks open the bush lies and propaganda and exposes this little hitler wannabe for what he really is…
We are behind you all the way brad…
Thanks for the great work you are doing… 🙂
Well, that was sure a let down….looks like Morgan is part of the problem. Martians, indeed!!
Emma
I’m not sure that this is the story Brad was referring to. I don’t see anything "new" in it. Anyone else?
The St. Petersburg Times is not much of a "major American newspaper."
BTW didn’t Judith Miller win a Pulitzer? Just asking (knowing the answer is "yes").
Now if only the derelict MSM will report on the "SCIENTIFIC REPORT: Evidence Strongly Suggests 2004 Presidential Election Results — Not the Exit Polls! — Were Biased and/or Flawed!"
It is so hard to believe that this is being completely ignored by the media and everyone in power in our country. It is like the dirty little secret that everyone is afraid to talk about.
re #31. When it happens you will know it.
The story by Lucy Morgan in the St. Petersburg Times is a joke. I can’t imagine that this is what Brad was referring to. She did not appear to have done ANY research at all. It reads like a press release from Feeney’s office.
I checked with the newspaper. She is presently the bureau chief in Tallahassee. Sounds like she’s in bed (figuratively and/or literally) with Feeney et al.
We’ll see.
I take Winter Patriot’s word for it, that we will know it when it happens.
Jeez I wish we were Canada instead of the U.S., so the Saturday paper were the big one instead of Sunday…. Of course if we were Canada the big scandal would be the abuse of $1 million by the Liberal Party. It is a fight for party survival!
Now it turns out it was Lucy Morgan, after all. Feh.
Well, Brad has now confirmed that the Lucy Morgan story WAS the one he was talking about.
I have to say I am thoroughly disappointed — actually, appalled is a better word — by her "reporting." This just proves that Pulitzers don’t mean jack-shit anymore.
This story could have been written by anyone surfing the net in an afternoon, with a heavy bias in favor of Feeney. Other than the new bit about the polygraph test — which, by the way, she does her best to discredit — there is nothing new in this story. There are, as Brad notes, quite a number of mispresentations and outright errors.
I think it’s nothing short of pathetic, definitely far more negative than positive in terms of trying to advance the story and get to the truth.
BTW, Tom Friedman has won three Pulitzer prizes — which I guess is ample reason for him to be the only NYT columnist who does not advertise an e-mail address for reader feedback. After all, if he needed other people’s input, he wouldn’t have won 3 Pulitzers, right?
From now on "Pulitzer winning" should never be appended in an attempt to lend credence to a story.
Those goddamned prizes are a bunch of shit! And like all good suckers, the mere mention of the name "pulitzer" sends ass kissing chemicals through our systems.
re #34. OOPS! got another one wrong! I HATE when that happens!
IMO, this article is nothing more than yellow journalism. Below are just a few examples of the way this article used descriptive phrases to intentionally diminish the credibility of anyone who claims that the elections in FL have been rigged.
"Web sites that traffic in conspiracy theories"
"a series of apparently unrelated events"
"To the Internet blogs…the hero of this tale is Clint Curtis" – apparently we are supposed to infer that Clint Curtis would have no credibility were it not for the tin foil hat wearing web bloggers.
"self-styled book author" – a phrase that deligitimizes anything he may have published.
"Feeney thinks some of the allegations are so hilarious he ordered copies of Curtis’ book, Just a Fly on the Wall, as Christmas presents. The book was published by Lightning Source Group, a print-on-demand business that markets through Amazon.com." – I suppose this might be interesting information for a gossip column, or maybe an article in the Enquirer. But what value does this have to a serious investigative report other than to implant the idea in the reader’s mind that Curtis is a quack?
"Feeney also notes that Curtis never mentioned the accusations until recently." – Isn’t this later disproven by the fact that Curtis made the allegations as far back as 2001? If so, why didn’t the author immediately rebut this false assertion by Feeney?
One hopes for better work than this sloppily written piece of trash from a Pulitzer Prize winner, but as others have noted, Judith Miller is a perfect example of just how meaningless that award is these days.
This story by Lucy Morgan is very disheartening.
Brad obviously was in contact with her and she wrote this bull. She stooped to the level of National Enquirer by even including Feeney’s "purple Martian Invasion" remark. "GREAT JOB Lucy Morgan! PS wipe your nose."
By not giving Clint Curtis equal time to rebutt Feeney’s statements, Morgan has continued offering up a steaming plateful of WH propaganda –instead of practicing the Journalist’s Creed. How long has it been since any current journalists have even read this, much less ?
Journalist’s Creed
The Journalist’s Creed was written by the first dean of the Missouri School of Journalism, Walter Williams. One century later, his declaration remains one of the clearest statements of the principles, values and standards of journalists throughout the world.
I believe in the profession of journalism.
I believe that the public journal is a public trust; that all connected with it are, to the full measure of their responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.
I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.
I believe that a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.
I believe that suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.
I believe that no one should write as a journalist what he would not say as a gentleman; that bribery by one’s own pocketbook is as much to be avoided as bribery by the pocketbook of another; that individual responsibility may not be escaped by pleading another’s instructions or another’s dividends.
I believe that advertising, news and editorial columns should alike serve the best interests of readers; that a single standard of helpful truth and cleanness should prevail for all; that the supreme test of good journalism is the measure of its public service.
I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power, constructive, tolerant but never careless, self-controlled, patient, always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice; is unswayed by the appeal of privilege or the clamor of the mob; seeks to give every man a chance and, as far as law and honest wage and recognition of human brotherhood can make it so, an equal chance; is profoundly patriotic while sincerely promoting international good will and cementing world-comradeship; is a journalism of humanity, of and for today’s world.
Missouri School of Journalism
Look beyond the lousy reportage and note that someone is actually paying a private investigator to track down vote fraud. Who might that be? If he’s talking to Curtis, then he will sooner or later have to address Lemme’s death, Yang, and the rest of it one way or another. It’s nice to know others are looking for the smoking gun.
I stand by my original bet; $10.00 says this article is government sponsored propaganda. Pulitzer Prize my ass…
Dear Folks,
Just read the St. Petersburg Times article. As you stated above, there are differences in the stories I’ve read here and the msm paper in Florida. It is a crack in the stonewall of this administration. Before the end of his term, he will have to resign. I do believe this will happen. I do not believe the American people will let him get away with what he’s done. We have a really lame duck in office. Isn’t that nice. Thank you for letting me speak. spoontheclown
Torqued, would be interesting to see if Ms. Morgan goes on a cruise sometime soon…ala Feeney.
We have 2 possible wins in the article – the fact that Curtis took a lie detector test and passed, and the fact that there is an investigator involved (as per VDRES #44). I only hope Morgan’s mention of him is not another attempt to discredit the validity of Curtis’ claims.
Kevin Walsh is a former member of HSCA (House Select Committee of Assassinations.) History Matters
"In the wake of Watergate and President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974, a "reform" Congress undertook investigations of the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence agencies–the Church Committee published 14 reports containing its findings. With the public airing of the Zapruder home movie of the JFK assassination showing Kennedy reacting to an apparent shot from the front, there were calls for reinvestigation of this and other political assassinations of the 1960s.
In 1976, the House Select Committee on Assassinations undertook reinvestigations of the murders of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. In 1979, a single Report and twelve volumes of appendices on each assassination were published by the Congress. In the JFK case, the HSCA found that there was a "probable conspiracy," though it was unable to determine the nature of that conspiracy or its other participants (besides Oswald). This finding was based in part on acoustics evidence from a tape purported to record the shots, but was also based on other evidence including an investigation of Ruby’s underworld connections. The acoustics evidence was disputed by a panel of scientists, but that "debunking" has itself come under attack recently."
-more-
Kevin Walsh is one of our Patriotic heroes:
Live by the Sword
"Next I made a trip back east to confer with former HSCA investigator Kevin Walsh. Since his days with the HSCA, Walsh, now a private detective, had become a one-man lobby. For ten years, he had mounted a behind-the-scenes campaign to encourage legislation freeing the HSCA’s material. Kevin gave me a letter he had been trying to get to Stone that essentially corroborated what I had been trying to tell the Oscar-winning director. Upon returning to Dallas, I hand-delivered the letter to Stone. By now, he was convinced.
The closing credit phrase was inserted, and while Warner Brothers printed up some postcards, the film’s distributor eventually backed out of this strategy. Instead of giving up, a few volunteers and I decided to stand outside theaters to hand out the few hundred postcards we managed to obtain.
As I had hoped, Stone’s film, while completely misleading, created a hurricane of controversy, and made the Congress see the political benefits of freeing the records. A number of us began working feverishly with the relevant politicians to draft legislation. Among those who deserve acknowledgement are Kevin Walsh, Jim Lesar, Eric Hamburg, and Mark Zaid. Oliver Stone himself should also be recognized for his travels to Capitol Hill. They encouraged the legislation’s passage. As it turned out, public support for the bill was virtually unanimous, many on the outside of the policy-making loop were convinced that total disclosure would indicate the government’s role in JFK’s assassination, while the politicians they implicated were convinced the released material would vindicate them. The legislation (the so-called JFK Act) passed easily in 1992."
This is great news but let’s remember that Morgan’s piece was a propagandized write up where she did her best to lighten the wieght of what’s really going on.
The corruption in Florida and Washington is at an alarming rate. It’s time for us to strengthen our movement and really push this issue to the front page.
CT Patriot #42, you summarized my thoughts exactly.
What an irresponsible bitch. The subject matter is just as important as terrorism.
Dear Lucy Morgan,
Crackerjack needs it’s prize back, the one you call a Pulitzer.
If Lucy Morgan had credibility she would have asked why Feeney has not passed a lie detector test nor even taken one!
Hell, it is like pulling hens teeth just to get Feeney to say anything on the record.
So in this tale told by Lucy in the sky she castigates the one who talks on the record, is open, and who was willing to even take a lie detector test.
Shoot the valid messenger and kiss the ass of the ones who are hiding from disclosure?
That is not journalism … it is sick propaganda.
—–
"If Lucy Morgan had credibility she would have asked why Feeney has not passed a lie detector test nor even taken one! "
Dredd
—–
you see that’s reason she wrote this, she has NO credibility. She is nothing more than a republican ( Jeb/Feeney) shill.
Too little, too late, too bad.
Almost forgot to say, Thanks Brad. It must be frustrating, dealing with this kind of MSM treatment, over and over.
Lucy Morgan: Imagine if this were any other serious subject matter, and if you treated it in the same careless, frivolous, and most irresponsible way. Your whole introduction is to discredit everything that follows before you introduce what it is. It would take hours to go back and re-read everything Brad has reported and to then point out precisely the large sections of your article that are totally irresponsible. I’m sure others here will point out egregious errors. One thing that concerned me greatly was the frivolous attitude you gave the subject. What subjects do you consider serious, Lucy Morgan? Murder? Corruption? National Secruity? Ripped off tax payers? Espionage? Billing fraud? And all that besides the possible vote tampering. Yet again, another half-assed job by the MSM complete with "No one has proven ANYTHING". As we say here, WTF?
Does anyone have an e-mail address for the…ummm…"writer"…of the…"article" (Lucy), so I can tell her what I think of her "reporting"? Thank you.
Hi, Brad – While I know you will respond with a letter to "Lucy" (please post it for us to read also), would you also write a shorter letter to the Editor of the St. P’s Times, rebutting her article – one that the Editor would find of the proper length and tone to publish, with some points that will catch the readers’ attention. I read the letters to the Editor of my local paper all the time – often it’s the best part of the newspaper – some of the readers/writers are very savvy people who have some great ideas and comments and are paying attention to what’s happening. Thanks, Brad.
I’m beginning to understand "head-bangers." The brick walls we keep running up against…
I was just over at Raw Story and clicked on a headline, "President seeks access to hundreds of millions of accounts ‘to prevent terror.’ " A Reuters page came up, with the legend, "We’re sorry. This story is not available."
A-A-A-A-RGH!!!
St. Ptersburg Times ownership group: The Poynter Institute, Website can be found here.
According to the book THE VANISHING NEWSPAPER by Phillip Meyer, The Poynter Institute is a non-profit organization.
What kinds of stories can be reported, and how it is reported is heavily influenced by the owners and editors.
I can only assume that Lucy Morgan was allowed to report on this subject with a leash around her neck.
Re: PEGGY #54
Lucy Morgan’s email is: morgan@sptimes.com
Pulitzer prize winner – my arse!
Lucy Morgan’s ass is a Pulitzer Prize.
…Dredd said on 4/9/2005 @ 5:16pm PT…
"If Lucy Morgan had credibility she would have asked why Feeney has not passed a lie detector test nor even taken one!"
Right on, Dredd! Exactly what I thought! I wish I could find odds in Vegas as sure a thing as Tom Feeney not being able to pass a lie detector test. I’d be a rich man (maybe he just needs time to go into training to learn how to beat such a test).
By the way, what kind of lousy reporting is that? Lucy Morgan slants her writing to everyone being a crackpot EXCEPT Tom Feeney-and-company.
I’m getting very frustrated with this kind of reporting. It’s like swimming through mud getting through to the truth. I’m so nervous about them doing something to Clint Curtis BEFORE this stuff gets exposed in a major enough way. It’s always "tin-foil hats"-"Commie"-bullshit when they come back against these charges.
It’s my opinion that those in the MSM consider this story too hot to handle. How could anyone look at all this and think this crook Feeney is an innocent man? Is anyone really that blind? I doubt it. I think they’re just scared. Are there no Woodwards-and-Bernsteins in the 21st century? Anyone with the GUTS to follow this through?
But…at least this much has made it to a newspaper. It is a step forward, though Lucy Morgan did her damndest to neutralize it to favor Feeney.
Do you know what? This SP Times scam was one of the cruelest, most sadistic switcheroos to be pulled on an honest public in my lifetime.
Brad was led to believe that, finally, his investigations would be receiving honest attention; and his "Pulitzer" vindicator turned his investigative reportage into sleazy blue journalism simply by implication. Something has GOT to be done. And I’m not blowing into a bag. We have GOT to get some information freely circulating.
Does anyone have inside addresses for Seymour Hersh or any one of the excellent NYT editorial writers? Can’t we easily expose this travesty? I’m doing some inside homework.
Also, I’d like to know WHY the St. Pete Times is considered MSM. Because they’re feinters with the truth, perhaps?
KIRA #47
"We have 2 possible wins in the article – the fact that Curtis took a lie detector test and passed, and the fact that there is an investigator involved (as per VDRES #44). "
Correct on both Kira and VDRES ,lie detector test results can now be included in any discussion or arguments we have with "non-believers".
The new political mantra
"Would you be prepared to state that under a polygraph ?"
:crazy:
This bad reporting is very frustrating. Brad, keep up the good work and let us know what we can do to help.
I think one thing driving MSM is a feeling of superiority to and fear of bloggers.
Brad
any chance of obtaining the list of questions put to Clinton Curtis for the polygraph?
May who pays the "investigator",
Live long and Prosper.
Feeney says "He (Clinton Curtis)accuses me of participating in or committing treason, murder, even worse – everything you can think of in the book he publishes in the summer of 2004," Feeney complains, "but he doesn’t accuse me of tampering with an election until the election controversy in Ohio arose," referring to unproven allegations of voting irregularities in 2004 that some Democrats say cost John Kerry the election.
Why doesn’t the lying SOB Feeney sue Clinton Curtis’s arse off for defamation
"Sometimes it’s hard to set the record straight.
That’s because it’s hard for some people to admit mistakes." …. and finally,
"In this world of journalism, seems to me we are getting awfully thin of skin when we cannot admit we made a mistake.
We all make them."
Quotes by LUCY MORGAN, Times Tallahassee Bureau Chief
Published January 8, 2005
Lucy, we trust you will swallow hard on a few cc’s of your own medicine and "set the record straight", once Brad has set you straight on a number of serious errors and omissions in your Curtis/Feeney/Yang story.
We live in hope!
Ches #67
Ches said, "I think one thing driving MSM is a feeling of superiority to, and fear of bloggers."
This is exactly right, and was my first reaction to this so-called Pulitzer Prize winner’s *work*.
Bloggers, and investigative news sites like Bradblog, Dkos, Rawstory, Nashua Advocate etc., are a serious threat to RWCM and what they percieve as their territory.
I have to say one more thing, and I will qualify it by first saying that I have been participating at Bradblog for 4-5 months now and reading without commenting for a little while before that. I have the utmost respect for Brad and monumental effort he is making toward revealing the crimes of this Adminstration, and the failure of the media to report the facts. As well, I have contributed to help Brad in his efforts and wholeheartedly support him, but I have to say that I felt somewhat mislead by the headline to this story above. Clearly the resulting article is crap and does more damage than good to the cause of breaking out of the RWCM imposed news blackout. While the fact that Clint Curtis passed a polygraph test is certainly good news, the original teaser led me to believe that a major breakthrough had been achieved, and clearly that has not happened. I just think the lead-up was overblown and wasn’t necesarry. Just my opinion.
Flame away if you must.
Peace
That was well stated Supersoling #72.
I think that is the nature of headlines no matter who, good or bad, is the journalist. There is an impulse to catch and alarm the reader, and the headlines in all their enthusiam so often overstate the case.
here’s contact info for the St. Petersburg Times for all those wanting to send a letter to the editor.
Letters to the editor: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
Lucy Morgan’s email: morgan@sptimes.com
Full contact page: http://connect.sptimes.com/
Ron Brynaert #65
I agree Ron,
SP Times Managing Editor, Stephen Buckley hardly comes across as a BU$H ADMINI$TRATION cheerleader in this piece.
…CONTACTS…
Send an Email to Lucy Morgan.
Send a Letter to the Editor.
My letter to the editor of Lucy Morgan’s newspaper:
"Greetings,
I am writing to complain about the article "http://www.sptimes.com/2005/04/...html" in your paper. I am quite aware of the history of the facts involved in this matter, having read the court dockets, scores of articles pro and con, and discussed the issues openly for a long, long time.
Your article is wrong headed and the assertions in it are askew.
One wonders if Lucy would have castigated Feeney for taking a lie detector test and made fun of the results?
If you want the kind of silence where you can hear a pin drop, have Lucy ask Tom Feeney to take a lie detector test on the relevant facts at issue in her article.
Can you hear the thousands of us who are aware of the real story laughing out loud at the thought of Feeney agreeing to take such a lie detector test?
And as for the tale Lucy told, it gets a D- grade since she did not interview Curtis nor Friedman. Journalism 101 instructs us to contact all relevant parties.
Lucy only contacted the ones she needed to in order to slant the article hazardously close to Feeney.
The only realistic and relevant issue she presents is the fact that the one she castigates in the article is the only one who had the faith to take a lie detector test.
What is it with punishing those who tell the truth?
sincerely,
[name and address]"
This is extremely disappointing news. Morgan’s article has done nothing to bring the Curtis story into the mainstream. If anything it is an attempt to quash it. The way she presented it, it will not pique the interest of other MSM to report further on it.
On a side note: Brad, please take up the offer of some of your readers to do free proof reading of your blogs. There are several typos in this blog, including the title of Morgan’s article. These errors diminish your blog unnecessarily.
Bushwacker #75
I understand that the managing editor doesn’t come across as a Bush supporter, but the Curtis story is less about Bush and more about Feeney and the political elite in the world of Florida politics.
Editors have a large say in how the story gets reported. Owners have an even larger say in what gets reported. Although the St. Petersburg Times is indepedently owned, they’re not immune to the powers that be. In fact, I’d say the board of directors probably go to the same golf clubs that many high level republicans and republican supporters go to. No major media organizations want to be first in responsible reporting for fear of the Rupert Murdoch’s of the world.
They can have their paper and newschannels. I’ll stick to the internet myself.
Morgan’s piece was disappointing, but it put Curtis’s allegations
out in public view for perhaps the first time. The San Francisco
Bay Guardian recently did an article on the 9/11 truth movement
that like Morgan’s piece was careful to distance itself from the
allegators but actually did a nice job of presenting the issues.
Morgan’s work will pique curiosity among some, and astute
readers will be able to read between the lines and recharacterize
some of them–"Feeney laughed the charges off."
Morgan doesn’t want any anthrax letters, nor does she wish to
be "necklaced" with charges of "tinfoil."
It’s disappointing, as were the WaPo and NYT articles about
the election fraud studies, but it’s better than nothing. Let’s
see if they publish any of the letters.
What Brian says in #80, that’s true. Remember that, when the 2000 "recount" studies were finally released, with the study-sponsoring MSM headlining "Bush won" over articles stating that Gore won, The Economist published a correction. It said:
This is great news. Thank you for all your work Brad.
But remember the PTB only cite lie detectors when it supports their case, not when it hinders it.
They’ll say lie detectors are junk science, "Your honor lie detectors are highly inaccurate"…yet in the next breath "Your honor, the defendant DID refuse to take a lie detector test…"
Morgan’s article was linked in WhatReallyHappened.com. On their home page they have an additional, enlightening comment (see April 9, 2005):
"You don’t suppose the fact that ABC, CBS, and NBC own the company that counts the vote has anything to do with how defensive the mainstream media is on this issue, do you?"
In another article they succinctly prove how the media lies, the CIA lies, the FBI lies and the government lies. All of our efforts are being completely nullified by a constant stream of lies conveyed to the public in a way we can never hope to compete with.
Well, even within yellow journalists a few facts may spring out. At least we have additional facts and further proof that Clint Curtis is telling the truth. For that I am thankful.
As for the writer of the article… She is more suited for the domestic services industry. Now back to your Feeney/Bush blowjobs er, uh, pulitzer shots Lucy Morgan.
Torqued –
Oh yeah; she’s all choked up. What in Hades has this supposed "journalist" bought into?
A topical excerpt from Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida:
Hmm. Maybe it would have been better to take Cassandra seriously.
No doubt this was a crappy, slanted article filled with snark…but…actually…the St. Petersberg Times is one of the most liberal msm papers in the country.
I’d suggest everyone write letters to the editor pointing out the condescension and the failure to interview Brad or Curtis.
Now…I’m not saying the St. Pete Times is liberal…I’m just saying that they are one of the most liberal…and I think that they will print letters that are filled with facts to refute her story.
Goddam this makes me angry… and that’s all I have to say really, or I’ll go on an all out rant.
Keep up the great work Brad!
The truth is an illusive thing, and I have not found many journalist anywhere who are dedicated to it entirely. The story has always been the thing. How it sells. The business has always been filled with big intimidating bosses who lay down the law.
This is happening on both sides, as eager folks print their stories in the great rush of the press.
I have learned to always read between the lines.
We have to be patient since the truth desires revelation at some point almost as if it has a mind of its own. The media is big business now and it doesn’t do much good to agonize over its lack of nobility. Just try to get the truth, hold on to it, and disseminate it the best way you can. Like a mantra.
I keep hearing talk about our hopes for the 2006 & 2008 elections, about how we have to "vote them out of office". *sigh* I really do hate being such a skeptic, but…well, if you like fairy tales, here’s one:
Hansel & Gretel in the Repugnant Forest
Hansel & Gretel were lost in the woods. But not to worry, they had lots of breadcrumbs, which they had bought from a nice, friendly bird. The breadcrumbs had worked before, led them right out of the woods & back home.
Birds always ate a few, but it was a good system, the breadcrumbs. Tried & true! Now, they had heard a rumor that maybe they should use pebbles instead, but they figured it was better to rely on what they knew. There was no PROOF that pebbles would work, and in fact they had heard that the people talking about pebbles were all crazy godless commie leftist conspiracy theorists & they shouldn’t listen to them! So they left the trail of breadcrumbs.
Well, what Hansel & Gretel didn’t realize was that the woods had been completely taken over by certain evil, greedy birds. They were the ones who had spread the rumors about anyone talking about pebbles. They also didn’t know that anyone caught in possession of pebbles had been bribed or threatened or both, so that hardly anybody dared even mention pebbles anymore. And they never suspected that the evil, greedy birds even had a
big breadcrumb factory hidden in the woods, and what they didn’t eat they sold for a fat profit to the
other birds & to innocent, gullible children like
Hansel & Gretel who just wanted to find their way
home. AND they had raked up every damn pebble they could find, too. So it was breadcrumbs or nothing. And as far as anybody knows, Hansel & Gretel are still wandering around in the woods, paying inflated prices for breadcrumbs. Last I heard they were both working in the breadcrumb factory for $5.15 an hour.
~The End~
great news….Kerry’s speaking out strongly:
yahoo news
Kerry: Trickery Kept Voters From Polls
By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN, Associated Press Writer
Many voters in last year’s presidential election were denied access to the polls through trickery and intimidation, former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry told a voters’ group Sunday.
"Last year too many people were denied their right to vote, too many who tried to vote were intimidated," the Massachusetts senator said at an event sponsored by the state League of Women Voters.
"There is no magic wand. No one person is going to stand up and suddenly say it’s going to change tomorrow. You have to do that," he said.
Kerry supporters have charged that voting irregularities in largely Democratic areas made it difficult for voters to cast ballots in the November election. A lawsuit in Ohio cited long lines and a shortage of voting machines in predominantly minority neighborhoods, but the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the suit.
Kerry also cited examples Sunday of how people were duped into not voting.
"Leaflets are handed out saying Democrats vote on Wednesday, Republicans vote on Tuesday. People are told in telephone calls that if you’ve ever had a parking ticket, you’re not allowed to vote," he said.
Kerry has never disputed the outcome of election, saying voting irregularities did not involve enough votes to change the result. Bush won the pivotal state of Ohio by 118,000 votes, giving him enough electoral votes to win re-election.
Bush supporters have denied using voter intimidation tactics to keep people from going to the polls. A call to the Republican National Committee media office was not immediately returned Sunday.
Earlier this year, Kerry joined Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., in filing voting reform legislation. The Count Every Vote Act would create a federal holiday for voting, require paper receipts for votes and authorize $500 million to help states upgrade voting systems and equipment.
more at the link above
Give Brad a break. He’s trying to handle five jobs at once.
This is a minor setback, which might become a plus, depending on Lucy Morgan’s response. Her piece is an abomination; what isn’t clear is her motivation for writing it. But we’ll find out.
I’m not so sure. I have lived in Florida for over 40 years. Lucy Morgan is an icon. She never hesitates to take off the head of politicos….year after endless year she has done so. She must know something more than we do. I was pretty much "sold" on the Curtis thing until her article. I guess there is an exception to the rule for most everything. Maybe she’ll re-visit the facts!!
Trouble is…she is very, very, very well-respected and it’s obvious by what Brad said that she spent a long time on this article and this is what she came up with????? Me thinks there is something we don’t know.
Emma
I’ve always thought Kerry had plans. He is patient and tries to time his moves accurately. He is tight-lipped when he thinks it’s best. I’ve said so many times, he is bent on getting Dems in office in ’06 and himself in the WH in ’08, as of now. He can’t do that with a rigged election in favor of the Republicans. A lot will be happening. The repubs are losing so much popularity, that it might get very difficult to pull their swindles.
Kerry is deep into the game.
Taking back the House in ’06 is beyond what people were expecting, but it’s starting to look possible.
Teresa the optimist (LOL) until the people like this (below)are held accountable ,what the chance of fair elections ever.
from the home page of Bradblog
"It’s all over but the counting, and we’ll take care
of the counting." – Rep. Peter King (R-NY), Summer 2003
But example ,you know about Harris and Blackwell ,who will it be in 2006?
Like playing poker and the other guy can pick which cards YOU get .
H.A.V.A spent BILLIONS of YOUR tax dollars since 2002 ,to what end?
Your been bushwacked twice and counting…………
I always allow for the unpedictable. The Democrats have been stealing elections all along too. They know full well how to do it. If the puppet masters decide in favor of Democrats, that’s what it will be.
I am thinking that a sort of Republican downturn is in the wind.
In response to Emma’s post, first, there are many so-called "icons" in journalism that don’t deserve the credit that they’re given. Either they never were such great journalis, or they lost their vision and sense of purpose somewhere along the away.
Second, the Florida legislature is among the most corrupt in the nation. This is a very well-established fact. Many people both within and outside the state consider it an absolute joke. Lucy Morgan is bureau chief in the state’s capital. Often when journalists spend a lot of time reporting on a corrupt body and the public shows no interest, they eventually burn out. At that point, there’s two options: Move on to another job and/or career, or start looking the other way. Maybe that’s what happened to Ms. Morgan. She decided to start looking the other way in response to the conditioning of a population that simply doesn’t care about the corruption taking place right under their noses.
Ron Brynaert #88
Re. Count Every Vote Act
Unfortunately, this legislation will do nothing to change the fact that electronic voting machines can be hacked. The legislation calls for implementation of paper trails, in other words, a reciept that the voter gets to verify and would only be used in the event of a recount. It does nothing about the possibility of the machines being hacked after votes have been registered inside the machines and really, the machine can be easily programmed to count certain votes (lets say Kerry) as Bush votes internally while producing a reciept that says Kerry on it. Here is an excellant explanation of how paper trails by themselves, offer nothing, and here is another even better explanation.
Velvet Revolution’s "Divestiture for Democracy" makes the distinction between paper trails, and paper ballots here.
Of course the biggest problem in regard to getting *real* election reform is the fact that the Republicans control the House and Senate and it is highly unlikely that the Democrats can get it put into law.
There is a great compilation of voting, election, and fraud articles and opinions here.
Plus Curtis, Feeney, and our prize winning jack ass are bit players. It’s always great to solve a crime, and more so to send them to the Pen, but we have a well learned craft here… election tampering… and I’m not sure exactly how that should be addressed. They can only reveal the crime if some of the powers cooperate. One hope is the big game going on among them and that the next winners will be our pick.
Re. my own #95
Bad link. Try this for VR’s "Divestiture for Democracy", as if any of you don’t already know :O)
Hi, Supersoling #95 – Thank you for your post. I’m really disappointed that the CEVA is not what I thought it was. Barbara Boxer supports it. I didn’t realize it was quite different from VR’s DV4D. Rep. Conyers supports DV4D. Why aren’t the Democrats talking with each other? Why aren’t they better informed? Why can’t Boxer, Conyers, Clinton get it right? Where is the leadership? Who is coordinating their side? It’s ridiculous!
It’s a common occurrence for people to blind themselves to the political corruption, which is always go on in some measure. Boss Tweed in the times of Tammany Hall (Democratic), was one of the worst. He did, I understand, throw crumbs to the poor as he stole massive amounts from the city of New York, so that appeased them. He eventually went to prison, but it took a while. But it was amazing how blatant it was, and how the people ignored it. Nothing new.
RE: #95 Supersoling, the Count Every Vote Act would "make electronic voting source codes available for government record", hence e-voting machine manufacturers would no longer be able to hide behind their "proprietary source code" legal speak.
This Raw Story article covers the issue pretty well.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=118
Emma, I agree with you that Lucy Morgan has had a reputation as one of the straightest journalists in Florida. I’m not sure if it is deserved. Twice we have contacted her with good stories and she hasn’t even responded. The SPT has done some fabled scoops. They almost prevented the first Gulf War
But setting aside the issue of whether Clint Curtis is credible or not, just the writing quality of this article was just awful.
It’s really easy to write an article on stupid things said on blogs. In fact, it’s way too easy to constitute news. But Morgan’s is at least the second article in a week in a major paper on "those silly blogs." (The Des Moines Register had an article with a similar tone that Atrios panned.)
And it’s poorly written. It’s one thing to tear apart flimsy, unsubstantiated theories. It’s another to throw up a screen of lurid tidbits to distract. Buried in the Morgan article are at least three confirmed things that would seem to constitute news: (1) a Florida judge has stated that it is legal to bribe state employees as long as cash does not change hands, (2) an employee of YEI was selling prohibited technology to China, and (3) Curtis’s allegations are serious enough that a court felt obligated to hear them.
Look, it’s a long way from one guy with allegations to proving Tom Feeney helped corrupt an election. But this article seems like a calculated effort to discredit.
It sure isn’t journalism.
People do need to tell them that.
Teresa states that "The Democrats have been stealing elections all along too. They know full well how to do it."
This is completely unsubstantiated. It’s the sort of claim that makes people ignore whatever else one might have to say.
Look: President Carter, President Clinton, and John Conyers have all stated that there were serious problems with the 2000 (Carter and Clinton) or 2004 (Conyers) elections and that Bush may not have won.
Provide just one piece of evidence of Democratic cheating that is on par with just that. And don’t use the 1960 Nixon-Kennedy race because in fact that has been investigated and no evidence of systematic Democratic cheating was found (there were some isolated misdeeds). See Posner
Watch out for ambiguity.
Don’t let Curtis shoot himself in the foot. I remember watching his testimony, and cringing when I heard the Judge (or arbitrator or whatnot) ask if he had heard about the CEO of Diebold promising "to deliver the votes to the President." He hadn’t and didn’t comment on it, but the fact that the Judge felt it was necessary to bring the quote up–one which would be instantly shot down by any defense lawyer as being ambiguous–makes me think that some people are leading investigations astray by focusing on irrelevancies.
Think like a defense lawyer. Does Feeney have room to say: "I asked Curtis to develop vote-rigging software so any potential vulnerabilities in the election system could be examined"
If he does, and it seems to me that does, it means you will not be able to convince a judge or a jury. And that means, if he is guilty, that he’ll get off scott free because the prosecution failed to create a case.
It’s great and all that Curtis has sworn Feeney asked him to do this, and it’s doubly great that he has taken a lie detector test and shown that he is not conciously lying about it (of course, remember that lie detector results are inadmissible). Does that mean Feeney rigged the election? THE ANSWER IS NO. You need more evidence. What it means is that very likely, Curtis was asked to create vote-rigging software. The purpose of which is still unclear–meaning there is reasonable doubt. People here, for the most part, may not doubt it, it seems pretty obvious. But try arguing the case as it is to a good defense lawyer and they’ll tear you apart.
As for me personally, I’m still deciding what the deal with all of this is, and manoeuvring facts, like the obviously ambiguous "deliver the votes" quote to fit a conclusion does not sit well with me, and doesn’t make me respect arguments that Feeney helped rig the 2004 election.
JS remember to close your italics tag :hehe:
You guys, surely the aim of all honest political parties is to have a voting system in place so transparent that no inference CAN occur with the vote count ,end of subject.
Some would hope for a system so good as to be an example to all “new” and current democracy around world ,a system so good that they would want to emulate it.
A system the "people" can see is honest and accurate.
"Honest political parties"?
I don’t fly. And I am not at all enthused about boarding a space ship. But I fear that the only encounter I could have with an honest political party would be in another galaxy.
Rush22
Curtis never said anything about Feeney rigging the election in his affidavit. What he said was, Feeney asked him to write a vote rigging prototype. It was Mrs. Yang who said the code was needed to "control the vote" in South Florida. Those are the facts of Curtis’ affidavit.
Nowhere in Curtis’ affidavit does he state anything about vote altering software being used, just that it was asked of him to write one.
At the time he wrote the code, he assumed it wasn’t possible that people would allow hidden source code to be used, so he didn’t make a big deal of it then. Of course, we now know that hidden source code is used on virtually every machine. Curtis can only assert that vote altering machines exist as a suspicion of his based on what he knows of the Feeneys and the Yangs, nothing more, nothing less. That fact has to always be kept in sight.
Google and type in "The FBI uses polygraphs to eliminate suspects"
Teresa this would save you a trip
You guys, surely the aim of all free people is to have a voting system in place so transparent that no inference CAN occur with the vote count ,end of subject.
Some would hope for a system so good as to be an example to all “new” and current democracy around world ,a system so good that they would want to emulate it.
A system the "people" can see is honest and accurate.
…mmiixx said on 4/10/2005 @ 4:07am PT…
"…Why doesn’t the lying SOB Feeney sue Clinton Curtis’s arse off for defamation…"
Simple enough. He can’t afford this to get to such a public forum as a courtroom. Clint should publicly dare him to sue. There should be pickets outside the Florida State legislature with signs saying "Why aren’t you suing Clint Curtis?" Lets get into the "ring" and "duke" this out!
Mainstream Media is afraid of this story. The higher-ups don’t want it pursued. Brad is our best hope to be the new "Woodward and Bernstein" right now. No one in MSM has the nerve.
Thanks, Mmiixx. I’m with you. That’s why I’m here. I can’t afford the damn trip any way, as I am broke.
And I can’t afford to have my vote stolen, in these diminished circumstances I find myself.
Regarding your comment #92… You are definitely not alone. Everyone’s getting pissed with my ridiculous optimism. I know, I know,…I threaten to ruin the despair fest. I don’t blame you. Hope is the devil in the liberal blogosphere. And it does look grim in a way.
Just consider me a balancing factor. Somebody’s got to do it.
BB #111
Simple enough.So right, imagine Feeney under oath !
Discovery would interesting also!
I’m glad to see this is still going on. I hope you’re all staying safe (I heard about that one guy being killed). I’m also glad that Kerry is speaking out about this. Only thing is I wonder why now. Does he know something we don’t? Isn’t he working with Conyers and Boxer on this (each of their groups)? Like one person said I wish Boxer and Clinton will work to get rid of the machines. They’re, to me, trying to negotiate with the republicans. They can still hack the computers and change the votes! It won’t work. We have to have paper ballots. Here in my state we have them and never had any problems. Last month we voted for the top two canidates for our new mayor race and new the top two the next day. These machines just cause way too many problems. I’m sure you’ve all already seen this but at bushflash.com/media.html check out the "Stolen Election" video and votecobb.org and his video’s. Good luck and please keep us posted (I love your blog!)
I also wanted to add if Fenney really was innocent he’d be happy to do like Curtis and do a polygraph exam. Until then he has no creditability.
This is in response to Rush-22. You are applying a courtroom standard to a political question.
If Tom Feeney were to admit he was present when Yang asked Curtis to design a vote-rigging prototype (that’s the allegation, not that Feeney made the request), do you think the matter would then revert to a courtroom argument? No way! It would, at long last, become a mainstream story, where the public could factor in all the other facts (the ethics inquiry against Feeney, the Yangs and Henry Nee, Lemme’s murder) before making a POLITICAL JUDGMENT that Feeney is crooked.
Feeney knows this as well as we do. If you’re right, that a defense lawyer could acquit him in court, then he should be willing to engage Curtis on the facts. This he has been unwilling to do, except through ridicule and bogus press releases by his former law firm and the Yangs.
Teresa I’m with you too.
Hope springs eternal.
Teresa #112
If anyone is getting pi$$ed at your optimism, they need to back the f&@k up. Besides, isn’t "ridiculous optimism" an oxymoron?
Hey, if things get much worse, we might have to pool our funds so we can all get seats on that rocket :O)
Hey Teresa! Here’s something to bolster optimism:
Bush approval slips to 45%, lowest of his presidency
USA Today – "The new poll found the largest drop for Bush came among men, self-described conservatives and churchgoers."
😀
Hey Supersoling! The Early Bird!
What in the hell our we gonna fuel that sucker with?
Joan says in #87: "I keep hearing talk about our hopes for the 2006 & 2008 elections, about how we have to "vote them out of office". *sigh* I really do hate being such a skeptic, but…"
If anyone else is as big a Mike Malloy fan as I am: What gets me is that first he lectures us about how the Democratic Party is like a drug, and now he is professing the need to "vote out" the Bushists. I guess he’s just an addict. Myself, I will stand being fooled once, maybe even twice, but not three times.
In #88, Ron Brynaert said: "great news….Kerry’s speaking out strongly."
This is not good news, it is merely how Democrats keep you addicted; every now and then they give you a free hit. Their technique was so obvious, last January, that I am shocked how many good people continue to fall for it. I speak, of course, of the "debate" about the crappy election — your free hit — which was followed by a complete cave-in when it came to doing anything. Only Barbara Boxer and a few good people in the House weren’t just giving you a free hit.
It was then I saw the pattern and quit the Democratic Party on the spot.
John Kerry has surprised me by proving himself a flip-flopping coward. John Edwards, who did not wish to concede, should have gotten the nomination. Whether he would have had the necessary fortitude we may never know, but his easy willingness to lose his Senate seat was a good sign.
Yaaay, Kira!!
Thanks! I knew about the drop, but not the men, conservative churchgoing part. Very, very good.
God Bless ’em!!
What do you suggest, Chemo-electric trashman?
The mainstream media is still petulant over the fact that bloggers are still showing them up as incompetent, lazy, and even reluctant reporters.
They whine and complain that bloggers don’t have their knowledge or experience or any kind of checks and balances to back up their facts.
In my opinion ( column I write on Awesomereport.com) the bloggers have a better system of checks and balances, because they constantly check each others facts and believe me when a blogger gets it wrong, it is all over the other blogs in a heartbeat. And apparently they are now doing the same thing for mainstream reporters. (I think that is the part that stings the most)
Mainstreamers had better stop whining and start doing the job, or they may just find themselves left behind. :satisfied:
Teresa says in #96:
Your optimism makes sense to me only if there is a Democratic plan to out-cheat the Bushists, and I think there is no such thing. Nor do I believe the premise that Democrats are every bit as corrupt at election stealing as the Bushists are now. The existence of corrupt Democratic machines in other places and times is no solution to whatever problems we face today.
I gotta agree with the Trashman, the whole point with election tampering is that it follows the old adage of "He that pays the piper, picks the tune." The choice of President is no longer how many votes can you get, but how much money have you got and the Corporates will win that particular game every time. The Democrats are almost as much in the Corporate pockets as the the Republicans, so whoever is elected is irrelevant, the Corporate interests are served at the cost of the public in virtually every instance.
Until someone has the balls to rely on public donations only, this travesty will continue. IMO, Corporate money serves any nations democratic health as much as Corporate junk food serves it’s physical health.
Tampering is wrong, no matter who does it or what their justification is. If we adopt their means, we will sooner or later (and probably sooner) become them – I would rather nail my Johnson to a coffee table than let THAT happen.
Keep the faith sibs.
I gotta agree with the Trashman, the whole point with election tampering is that it follows the old adage of "He that pays the piper, picks the tune." The choice of President is no longer how many votes can you get, but how much money have you got and the Corporates will win that particular game every time. The Democrats are almost as much in the Corporate pockets as the the Republicans, so whoever is elected is irrelevant, the Corporate interests are served at the cost of the public in virtually every instance.
Until someone has the balls to rely on public donations only, this travesty will continue. IMO, Corporate money serves any nations democratic health as much as Corporate junk food serves it’s physical health.
Tampering is wrong, no matter who does it or what their justification is. If we adopt their means, we will sooner or later (and probably sooner) become them – I would rather nail my Johnson to a coffee table than let THAT happen.
Keep the faith sibs.
In #123 Teresa asks me: "What do you suggest, Chemo-electric trashman?"
I don’t know.
As for optimism vs. pessimism, to a large degree this is merely a difference in the techniques by which individuals manage their anxiety. I am a defensive pessimist; one of the better known strategic optimists, on the other hand, is Randi Rhodes. Listen to her sometime, and compare that with Mike Malloy, who is a defensive pessimist. (Do some google searching on my terminology, if you like.)
Actually I do know what I suggest — if it is practical for you, move to Canada or elsewhere you would find it agreeable. Seriously.
If have an autistic family member living in the care of the county, which may keep me here. But do at least get a passport if you do not have one.
You’re right, Chemo, about past corrupt machines being irrelevant. All I am saying is that the decisions about who wins are made by people we are not aware of. They are behind both parties. I think maybe all presidential elections are rigged. But if they decide to put in a Democrat, that person will adhere somewhat to traditional Democratic party policies.
It is a very complex game of back room deals and such. Maybe the start to reform is to try and learn as much as possible about how the game is played.
Rhandi and Mike are the only two I listen too, and I understand your terminology. I often like listening to Mike. I prefer him. I agree about approaches to anxiety. The pessimist deals with his by preparing for disappointment. The optimist likes to experience joy until the disappointment comes.
Da Wookie says: "I gotta agree with the Trashman, the whole point with election tampering is that it follows the old adage of "He that pays the piper, picks the tune." The choice of President is no longer how many votes can you get, but how much money have you got and the Corporates will win that particular game every time. The Democrats are almost as much in the Corporate pockets as the the Republicans, so whoever is elected is irrelevant, the Corporate interests are served at the cost of the public in virtually every instance."
I don’t know that I would agree with myself, if that’s what I said. 🙂 In my opinion the problem with the Democrats is not that they are bought, but that they are Chamberlain to the Bushist’s Hitler. On the whole the Democrats mean well, but they try to buy peace by betraying their allies, and they get war anyway.
Also, I do have hope that the people will revolt against the Bushists massively enough to overcome the vote stealing. Seriously, I think there are limits to the capacity of the Bushists to steal elections — but I presume as the default case that they will not reach those limits.
As for how to run elections, I don’t think it matters whether they are done on paper ballots or machines, nearly as much as other things matter. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ to get an idea of what I think matters — you will find an example of how to pressure even the reluctant into supporting the community.
Teresa said: "Rhandi and Mike are the only two I listen too, and I understand your terminology. I often like listening to Mike. I prefer him. I agree about approaches to anxiety. The pessimist deals with his by preparing for disappointment. The optimist likes to experience joy until the disappointment comes."
Good marriages often have one of each, so they can compensate for each other’s deficiencies.
I have been keeping a sort of score in my head, though, and it has turned out that Randi Rhodes has been way off — for example, telling people not to worry, because there would be a "recount" in Ohio — and Mike Malloy also has been too optimistic — for example, predicting violence if people were kept from voting, and not predicting the vote would be stolen again. (I made that mistake as well, by assuming that exit polls would be a deterrent.)
Things are worse than they appear to most of us. For example, Bob and Mary Schindler were not acting out of love for their daughter — the loving thing would have been to let her brain stem die — but out of fear of losing control of her. I could see this right away, due to milder versions of the same thing happening in my own life. When I was 28 years old, still living in my mother’s house, one day I put a lock on my bedroom door; when my mother found out, she went nuts and nearly smashed the door down, demanding I remove the lock. It was a sign that I was breaking away from her. So it was with the Schindler family, except it was much worse with them. Malloy did not see this and was too optimistic.
We are in a very bad situation.
Who, exactly is in this bad situation, Chemo?
No one knows what’s going to happen. There is probably a 50/50 chance that things will take an upswing. Laws of physics. Life isn’t against us. It’s full of ups and downs. And no one’s in charge.
Gotta catch some zzzz’s…..later.
I’m just getting around to reading this article written by Christopher Bifani. You guys may have already read it, but I just love these 2 paragraphs! I had to share…
The Moral of Our Story
"We have the moral values, dammit. We oppose invasion, pre-emptive adventurism, eco-rape and the whole friggass Bushmob on moral grounds first. But in our rush to support Kerry as the lesser of two weasels, we failed to get that point across. We failed to rassle and pin the right on their own flawed moral mat.
Gitmo. Abu Ghraib. Shock and awe. Attempted assasination. Each one of these should have been framed not as “the wrong decisions,” but as the morally corrupt choices of a murderous hate-filled gang. The secular electorate should have been drilled in no uncertain terms: These are things you go to jail for. And to the religious electorate: These are things you go to hell for."
PS It’s a great article start to finish.
I hope everyone will send a letter to the editor and email Lucy Morgan as has been suggested.
I doesn’t have to be critical in the sense of offensive, but it should express concern about how the article is wanting.
Perhaps they will do a follow up noting that it is Feeney who is reluctant to go on the record or on the polygraph, not Curtis.
The polygraph factor may not mean a lot to the courts but it will mean a lot to the public.
And Lucy’s story will then be more realistic instead of it being more of a tale as it is now.
So get those emails and letters going …
In #134 Teresa asked: "Who, exactly is in this bad situation, Chemo?"
In my opinion, every person on Earth: the worst thing the Bushists are doing is to hasten and worsen the global warming. I have lived in the Twin Cities for less than 14 years, and in just that time I have seen the climate here become appreciably warmer. Do a google search on the condition of Mount Kilimanjaro’s snowcap and you might be shocked. But that is not what everyone will see; for example, the melting of the north polar cap is spilling freshwater into the North Atlantic, where the ocean currents are driven, in part, by the pattern of salinity. The flow of warm water towards northern Europe may cease suddenly; the Twin Cities, known for its cold winters, is at about 45 degrees North latitude, as are Ottawa and Montreal; London, on the other hand, is at about 50 degrees North latitude.
And species are disappearing at the greatest rate known to have occurred in the entire history of Life. Think about it. His push to hasten the process of destroying our world will be Bush’s greatest legacy.
Trashman, it’s very important that informed people continue to vote. One reason that politicians feel entitled to behave as they do is because so many people don’t vote… and many of those who do vote do so because they have been misinformed.
And here’s some important history. The Democrats have almost never been the origin of fundamental change (FDR was an exception). But they have been the agent through which it occurred. Discontent bubbles up through third parties. When it gets significant enough, the Democratic Party coopts it and legislates enough to dissipate it.
Sure, the Democrats on the whole are bums. Always have been. But unlike third parties, they occasionally deliver.
And a few Dems are not bums. Those ones are stars.
I’ve just read the article and the most ridiculous parts are the Feeney quotes. But, we all know Feeney by now and we know his "talking points" (btw, aka red herrings) about tin foil hats, martians, etc., by heart. So he’s following his talking points. Big deal. His word is now proven useless because he is quoted in rebuttal to Curtis. In other words, his statements automatically make him the liar because Curtis passed the lie detector test.
There is an investigator on the scene. That’s what we have all wished and prayed for. He will come through…unless he’s being paid for by a front group of course.
Well, we have done enough of our own research on the facts associated with the death of Ray Lemme to know there should have been an investigation. Now there is…we think.
Bob Bilse #111 – re: Woodward and Bernstein –
The farther this goes, the more I’m thinking what we need is a Woodward and Bernstein but from a media source outside of the US
And yes, that’s a sad statement – but we can no longer count on those within this country to fight the corruption that’s taken over our government. We can’t even get the word to all the citizens that there is a definite problem, thanks to the contributions of people like author of the article in this thread. We need help.
No matter how bad things get, we still have to vote. We have to at least make it that much harder to cheat. Not voting is conceding. All who are able should vote.
Glad to see there is lots of interest in the Curtis/Feeney investigation. I emailed the reporter and gave her my 2 cents. I hope all of you do the same.
The fact that her story tries so hard to see Feeney’s side is OK, sadly this is what is necessary these days lest she be Ratherized by the wingnut sound machine. If and when this story shows up on 60 minutes or any other major source, it will need to have Mike Wallace first bringing up the facts and the allegations that follow, then, in a nod toward "fairness", something from Feeny. Thats OK, it will get this going on a viral level all over the states and the world hope. People will see him squirm and in their gut know he is lying.
I have followed this story all along, And got those who would listen in my red family to check out the bradblog, and black box voting, the statistical data compiled by the Edison-Mitofsky report as well as other reports, on top of what we now know with all the voter supression, not enough machines, 10 hour lines, Ohio’s Blackwell, heading the bush campaign.
This is not a conspiracy theory!, it should alarm the hell out of anybody who votes in america.
Please be active in supporting voting reform
Clinton Curtis, Scott Ridder, Giuliana Sgrena, and other whistle blowers, are the purest, most commendable patriots of our time!
Thanks brad!
Another whistle blower who is a true American Patriot – Sibel Edmonds – please sign the petition here:
"A Petition to require the immediate release of the entire report completed in July 2004 by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-IG) of its investigation into confirmed reports by FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, but which has remained classified; and further Petition that it be followed by a joint investigation by Congress, including open public hearings, into those reports of wrongdoing, criminal activities, and cover-ups against the security and interests of the United States and its citizenry."
-more-
Raymond Lemme, Gary Webb, Clinton Curtis, Scott Ridder, Sibel Edmonds etc. should go down in history as people who put "Country over Currency ". In these times no higher honour can be bestowed upon a person.
Mmix-
You got it!
Mmix-
You got it!
Mmix-
You got it!
Kira BBV would help.
Good Point, MMIIXX. Winter Patriot is looking at it, but maybe I should post it at BBV as well. Thx for the heads-up.
YAY!!! MMIX – You Got It Got It Got It!
Hehe! Hi Peg. My Internets has been flaky tonight. I wonder if it’s going around, seems there have been more than the usual number of repeated posts this evening.
Earlier I was going to look about for a list of current whistle-blowers. I know we’ve missed some. But, I got sidetracked – right now I’m working out the current Peach State Poll data to see just how skewed it is.
So far it looks very weighted in favor of the repugs. You know – the way it’s been written and reported is that 90% of Georgians believe their votes were counted accurately with the paperless DREs. But after gathering the election data for GA, I believe the write-up for the poll is VERY misleading. We shouldn’t stand for that. Our GA SOS bought DREs for every county in GA. We’re into in 100%. Therefore – This Peach State Poll is going to be scrutinized.
Anybody out there good at analyzing Poll data – want to help?
I’ll report back somewhere on Bradblog when I get it worked out.
Brad,
EXCELLENT WORK!!! Thank you so much for putting together this wonderful article. Keep up the good work and keep up us informed.
America’s Work Stories
http://usaworkstories.blogspot.com
usaworkstories@aol.com
Feeny denies it all. He says they never even met. Curtis passed a lie detector. Why haven’t we seen anything reported about this on TV yet?? Not a single reporter has the guts to bring this to light? It’s like we are living in Fantasyland. Wake Up!
They spin it to be a distasteful conspiracy theory, and we are supposed to swallow that?? Not a chance. No way will we let this be buried like so many other Bushtrocities and illegal acts.
Tell your friends. Tell your family. Tell your neighbors. Tell your congressman. Don’t let history be rewritten by the real losers.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6667405/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_Curtis
Uhhhh.. i have no idea what to say 😀 teehee.. lmao im babbling aahahahaha im also talking to myself :O oddnedd i kno.. ahahaha 😛