At 92% it's one of the highest political values ever measured. Pretty much the ONLY way we can come up with anything more popular is to go to something about which there is NO SUBSTANTIAL CONTROVERSY. But with the ability to view vote counting and obtain information on it, THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS RAPIDLY MOVING TO ELIMINATE THIS WIDELY HELD AND BELIEVED VALUE ABOUT THE FOUNDATIONS OF DEMOCRACY.
WHAT DOES 92% MEAN? IT MEANS WINNING IF YOU KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE PRIZE
* It's way higher than people who wouldn't mind a free tax cut.
* It's Higher than Bush's approval rating after 9-11. http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm
* It's higher than the approval ratings of any departing President. http://uspolitics.about....rary/bl_historical_appro ...
* I'll bet it's higher than the approval ratings of Pres. Lincoln and Pres. Washington TODAY, if they exist. Though i'm willing to be proven wrong on that. Anyone?
* It's higher than the approval rating of any senator, governor or President since WWII, at any time. See, e.g., http://www.surveyusa.com...governorsrated051005.htm others at main link.
* It's higher than the 87% thinking oil companies are gouging consumers these days. http://alternet.org/wiretap/29788
* And, it's also higher than the percentage of people who can get a basic math long division problem right.
And so, if you can find it in your courage quotient to mention the high price of gas benefiting the oil companies, notch that up at least another 5% to get at how much easier it is to comment against secret vote counting and in favor of public involvement and rights to get information about vote counting...
I have been trying to get my issue of the dire need for "hand- marked, hand- counted" ballots air time at MyDD for friggin years. An frankly, the entire issue has been strongly, and overtly downplayed there for all those years! The Blog Masters themselves would come out and tell the Blog Constituents that "[loose paraphrase] this issue is not very important" I think I actually got banned at DKos for pushing this sucker.
I would relentlessly link to blackbox, and talk about all the great projects she was doing. It seemed like half the people at MyDD (and DKos) despised Bev Harris (founder of blackboxvoting.com). They didn't have much to criticize, and every now and then, someone would have this epiphany "but we're just sponsoring polls while she is the one who is really getting out there!" And sure as shit that was the truth. Bev ran a half-dozen ultra- goofy pictures of clueless voting machine supporters, which were wonderful, but that was strongly condemned by the Blog Masters at MyDD. "[loose paraphrase] They need to find some one else to run Black Box," they would demand.
SO NOW, 92% OF THE CITIZENS THINK IT'S IMPORTANT!!!
Well, after years of pounding at these fools, loosing my "trusted user" classification a half- dozen times, etc. they finally come out of voting computer compromise denial, kind of like Bush finally admitting there may be global warming. So they front- paged the following:
'MyDD', Front Page:
Verified Voting Needs Volunteers Add to Hotlist
by cos, Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 03:24:23 AM EST
(I'm the campaign blogger for John Bonifaz, a voting rights leader running for secretary of state in MA. This is a crosspost from Bonifaz's site.)
Verified Voting, founded by Professor David Dill in 2003, was the technical backbone of the massive election protection effort in 2004. I volunteered for them collecting signatures, organizing press conferences, lobbying, and in Florida on election day, taking phone calls from voters and poll watchers about voting machine problems...
However, I have always demanded complete abolition of all voting computers. And that vote counting be done only by randomly selected election jurors, at each voting site, on the night of the election. And that the results of the count at each voting site be publicly announced by the jurors at each site in from of randomly chosen witnesses before being submitted to centralized tabulation.
Of course, for every step forward, steps backward must be taken by the wiz kid Blog Masters. Now they want to banish any one who blogs about the 9-11 weirdnesses (which, by the way, make their ogre, George W. Bush look like shit).
9/11 Conspiracy Theories Will Result in Being Banned (Chris Bowers)
As a public note, as a result of sifting through recent diaries, I just banned three people for posting 9/11 conspiracy theories. Posting such theories is, and will always be, a bannable offense.
Posted at 08/06/2006 02:21:44 PM EST - #
My e-mail to Chris Bowers (chris XYZ mydd XYZ com), 8-7-06:
I cannot for the life of me figure out why you have decided to ban MyDD subscribers who post 9/11 conspiracy theories. They are merely opinions --- and they are not anti-liberal opinions. It disturbs me that you would ban people for having such a point of view.
Also, you will end up banning people who are not aware of this policy.
Frankly, I do not believe that those 9/11 events occurred in the manner which ostensible "common wisdom" seems to claim it did. How is it that all video records show that the two towers fell at the same speed as would, say, two apples, if they were dropped from the tower tops? How could 19 foreigners destroy them with nothing more than box cutters? Why do so physicists claim that there is strong evidence that a lot of thermite was ignited? Why was the physical evidence of tis enormous crime instantly hauled away to the other side of the planet? Etc?
Anyways, the ostensible "common wisdom" is, if you think about it, as much a "conspiracy" theory as any other theory is. Then people will ask: are you actually trying to provide cover for the entity that would be the most likely perpetrator?
If I were you, I would rescind this banning policy immediately. Please give this a second thought. I would guess that a very hefty percentage of MyDD subscribers do not believe the official story about 9/11.
I got no reply (not that I expected one) from the Blog Masters. Even after contributing tons of great insight and humor to their site, I am still not counted as much as a blog constituent.
All these "policy decisions" have ramifications that many people will surely miss. The folks at MyDD often insist that "there are many other sites where you can freely discuss 9-11 discrepancies." Well yeah, but 90% of those places are paleoconservative sites (which, by the way, do not banish folks for discussing liberal issues). If "liberal" sites allow only "liberal" issues to be discussed, and "conservative" sites allow only "conservative" issues, and they just make people who don't go along vanish / disappear, then the internet will find itself in 1984!!!
Anyway, yeah, please do smash the friggin machines.