Brad,.. and BradBlog contributors Bless you,...

news,... news ,.... news,...

your miles ahead of the MSM.

This Fascist Government is imploding,....

the wall of deceit is crumbling down,....

Gosh, I'm bidding on the construction of a Jericho Coffe House. Hmmm Jericho - how apropos.

Ahh.. those Christian Republicans! gotta love how they love to legislate morality... for others..

bah! wrong damn thread.. lol.. figures..

I'm waiting, I'm waiting, can't wait to see what this is - hoping it is big enough to boot them out of California for 06/06/06 as well as everywhere else! Send them down the road forever!

Link to new song

Brad ... you are AWESOME!!!!!!

Old Turk #7

Great song - I started feeling rather ill - thought it was the pictures scrolling down but then realized it was the people in the pictures themselves that was turning my stomach.

"That report confirmed the Leon County hack, and found 16 other bugs described as "a more dangerous family of vulnerabilities" which "go well beyond" what was discovered in Leon County."

And California Sec. of State Bruce McPherson certified the damn things anyway.

Hi,

I'm that PA former election dircetor that Catherine and Bev have been telling you about. I have one small correction for you from your story. Pennsylvania has no machine-based early voting, only paper absentee ballots, so there is time until 7:00AM May 16 until the first votes are cast on TSx machines.

Repeat: No "early voting" exists in PA.

V. Kurt Bellman

Diebold......
We're on to you.................

Thanks, Mr. Bellman. Please help keep Pennsylvania free from electoral crooks.

Mr Bellman,... welcome aboard,....

THX for the input.

And how are those paper absentee ballots counted?

To BVAC,

"And how are those paper absentee ballots counted? "

I hope you have an appreciation for irony, because in most counties that will be using DRE's on Election Day, the paper absentee ballots will be hand counted, at the precinct.

A few counties may have opted for optical scan, but under PA law it would make no sense, since the absentee ballots MUST be counted at the precinct, and that would add precinct scanners cost on top of the cost of DRE's.

For those counties that are using optical scan at the precinct for Election Day votes (presumably with DRE or AutoMark for accessibility cases), the absentee ballots will be added to their precinct scans at the end of the night.

Philadelphia County is still getting away with centrally counting absentee ballots, but no one else in PA can figure out how. It seems to be illegal. I think it has something to do with Philadelphia lawyers.

To Robert Rockwell Mills,

I wish I could promise you that I could have much impact on "the crooks", but I'm no longer an Election Director, and I am merely a private citizen, and there is a better than even chance that by November, I'll be an Alabaman.

Besides, since I don't live in Philadelphia or Pittsburgh, according to James Carville, I'll feel right at home.

"Pennsylvania is basically Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between." - James Carville

O BOY. kEEPUP THE GOOD WORK.

I think I can guess what that "horrifying" family of vulnerabilities may entail. I envisioned it on Nov. 3, 2004. Wouldn't it be lovely to be able to relax the paranoia about something so simple, so basic, so very central to the workings of our country as voting?

Welcome, V. Kurt Bellman, to the hair-pullers' club at BradBlog! And thanks for the reassuring info.

It's worth mentioning here that the Utah investigation of the TSx was organized by BBV, paid for by BBV, and used source code provided by BBV. Bruce Funk took courageous action to make this possible, as did Ion Sancho last year in Florida.

As Bev Harris posted here on the previous BradBlog story, BBV will be ensuring that ALL jurisdictions using the Diebold TS or TSx will receive full technical reports containing detailed instructions for election directors on ALL POSSIBLE ACTIONs that can be taken to mitigate the risk.

This dissemination will happen immediately once the report is finished. So don't expect your local election official to know anything about these vulnerabilities yet. Personally, I'd rather the election officials get the information before Diebold does, seeing as how Diebold likes to send its technicians around the country changing equipment without notice.

Since the report with all the necessary mitigations is still being written, election officials will have to hang on tight for a few more days. Otherwise they'd be making assumptions based on incomplete information, which is the last thing needed at this point. Even Michael Shamos does not yet have the full picture.

None of these actions would have been possible without BBV's contributors, who are the unsung heros in this story. They should feel proud of what their generosity has accomplished: steadily and systematically uncovering detailed, solid evidence of serious vulnerabilities to America's voting systems, providing information and advice to election officials, and helping citizens take effective action in their own communities. For a small organization BBV packs a mighty punch.

Brad deserves great compliments for his ability to doggedly keep this issue in the spotlight and for being such a good communicator.

I meant to say "the hair tearers' club." No, we don't assault each other's pig-tails!

And I second Catherine A's kudos and thanks to Brad. Great work!

Have to say to all: Great Work!

V. Kurt Bellman -

Welcome, and thanks for the clarification in re: early voting in PA. I'll try to amend the article for clarity there right away.

Peg C,

I got your meaning in the first place.

Before you go canonizing me, in the interest of full disclosure, you should know:

1) I'm a Republican, though less of one than I once was.

2) I don't believe 2004's election was stolen, although 2000's arguably kind of was. (Unless you figure into your 2004 calculation that G.W. Bush wouldn't have been on the ballot if his "loss" in 2000 had been upheld.)

3) I don't think there's a piece of election hardware that can save Rick Santorum unless western PA Democrats decide that having a Pittsburgh area Senator is more important than having a Democrat one.

4) I don't believe much of what I read on ideological blogs, and I read almost exclusively "mainstream" media.

5) I really admire Dr. Michael Ian Shamos, Doug Lewis of the Election Center, and MOST state and county election administrators I've ever met.

6) There is a paperless electronic voting machine that I really think is "the bee's knees." It's one few of you have heard of.

7) I used to think that "election reformers" were mostly nutcases, but not any more.

8) I used to lump Bev Harris in that, too, and I once had some pretty unkind things to say about her, and her people.

9) I am more concerned about what MAY happen from electronic voting than I am with anything that has already happened so far, and

10) I genuinely like discussing these issues even with people who disagree with me, because that's how human beings learn.

Lie Told, On Hold.

Diebold? No gold.
They will die cold.
The unused machines will green with mold.
Bankrupted, their assets will be sold!
In jail, execs must do as they are told.
Molesting inmates will make sure they get rolled.
(Something, something) in their backside fold.

Diebold is finished, their machines will not be used in November's elections.

Now onto the other Conservative owned E-voting machine companies that also pose a MAJOR NATIONAL SECURITY RISK!

Bye, bye paperless E-voting machines!

Bye bye Bush/Cheney dictator wannabees!

Helllloooooo IMPEACHMENTS!!!!!

HA! HAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

V. Kurt Bellman said:

"I genuinely like discussing these issues even with people who disagree with me, because that's how human beings learn."

That is precisely the feeling of most people here, I believe,
but you'll never convince the trolls!

Thanks for your imput.

OT

Anybobdy have a clue what's up with Raw Story?

I've been getting a blank screen with "Currently awaiting resolution...." in the top corner for the last 4 hours or so.

...V. Kurt Bellman said on 5/5/2006 @ 7:02pm PT...

1) I'm a Republican

2) I don't believe 2004's election was stolen

6) "the bee's knees."

-------------------

That must be what they call, faith based voting results. Here's how it works:

Yo, Bees on the knees!
Make the sign of the cross.
Then tally the tainted results.
Don't worry about moral delimmas,
because later
we'll sprinkle
our Jesus backed,
Republican winners
with holier than thou water!

(Complements of the Hellsaburpin
$1000,000,000.01 impurity system)

...Bluebear2 said on 5/5/2006 @ 7:36pm PT...

OT

Anybobdy have a clue what's up with Raw Story?

-----------------------------

I told them not to get their new servers from Diebold.

Could it be a Rethug hack attack?

KEVIN SCHMIDT, STERLING VA said

"I told them not to get their new servers from Diebold."
LOL

"Could it be a Rethug hack attack?"
Hmmmmm ?

I got the same message at Raw story. Hey thanks Brad, Alright everybody if you want this great reporting to continue,Help support Brad and his sleuthing.

One thing no one here has mentioned is the poor guy from Utah, soon to be an election martyr... pure atrocity this guy is getting the boot for actually doing his job- protecting the sanctity of the vote- and thus the very foundation of our democracy. Typical these days. And Mr. Bellman, while I admire your candidness, you should at least consider the possibility that the election '04 was stolen, there's enough evidence there, I believe- I'd love to run thru it for you, but I've got to go... will someone please direct this man to the proper resources? I smell a Republican refugee in the making. This story might blow up, let's see if MSM hops on board (yeah right)... one can always hope! Die, Diebold, DIE! And long live Brad, Bev, and everyone else without whom this information might never surface... Adios!

V. Kurt Bellman - Even after your caveats (and perhaps especially *because* of them!) Kurt, I say once again, welcome. I'm delighted you're here and hope you will stick around!

Bluebear2 - They switched servers today to a faster one, but it's taking time for the new IP propigate. John Byrne, managing editor, is not a very happy boy today.

Someone wrote:

1) I'm a Republican, though less of one than I once was.

So you stand for people who sell America out to the European banking families and who respond to questions about aforementioned subject with silence and arrest.

You must be a very small man indeed.

Learn this:
http://www.prisonplanet....050506askingquestion.htm

This story keeps growing and growing. This is just out on BBV, including yet more enticing details:

Posted on Friday, May 05, 2006 - 07:52 pm:

Utah notified of TSx problem, punished official who discovered it
This week, the state of Pennsylvania sequestered all Diebold touch-screens to implement an emergency security measure. Several more states are expected to follow.

The state of Utah has known that a critical security risk exists in its Diebold TSx touch-screens, but chose to punish the courageous public official responsible for identifying the defect instead of taking any efforts to learn what the problem is and correct it.

Below is a link to the security alert faxed to the Utah Lt. Governor, state elections director, Emery County attorney and Emery County commissioners on March 24.

Security alert - Diebold TSx
An Open Letter To The Administrators Of The Emery County Government.doc (35.3 k)

Shoot the messenger
Utah officials ignored the warning entirely, and instead flew Diebold attorneys to Emery County on the governor's airplane, where the Diebold lawyers were allowed to sit into a private executive session. In this session, a decision appears to have been made to lock Emery County Elections director Bruce Funk out of his office.

In Utah, the law requires that any employment decision be publicly noticed (it was not) and the county attorney is the designated counsel for county elections officials (County Attorney David Blackwell chose to side with Diebold against Bruce Funk). According to a tape recording of the public portion of the meeting, Bruce Funk repeatedly requested an attorney, but this was denied to him.

Funk was an eye witness to the security testing by Harri Hursti and Security Innovation, Inc. He knew first-hand that the machines represented a significant security risk. County commissioners told him he was going to be required to use the machines anyway, Diebold refused to provide a letter in writing indicating that machines it sold weren't used or loaded with inappropriate software; Diebold then told Emery County that it was going to cost $40,000 to check over the machines (the Diebold contract limits them to charging just over $1200 per day, Emery County has just 40 machines, and re-flashing all machines with a new system takes no more than 10 minutes per machine). Funk was told that he would not be permitted to watch Diebold technicians work on the machines, and they had already "visited" his machines while he was out of town for a day.

Legal issues
Because Funk was denied a lawyer, he didn't know that a little-known 1929 law in Utah was sometimes used by public officials to browbeat each other out of office. If certain public officials gang up and intimidate another public official, threatening punitive measures and dire consequences, urging resignation, if the targeted official tenders even a tentative and conditional resignation, under some interpretations that is held to stick. Diebold and the county succeeded in browbeating Funk into temporary submission; he quickly notified them in writing that he had no intention of resigning, so they locked him out of his office.

Black Box Voting has assisted Funk in securing qualified legal counsel and is underwriting the public policy legal actions to defend Funk against Diebold's actions --- ironically, with Diebold's own money, won in a Diebold false claims suit in California. A $76,000 fee was paid to Black Box Voting founder Bev Harris, and was subsequently contributed as a restricted donation for public interest litigation. The Diebold money is now helping support the whistleblower retaliation against Stephen Heller and actions to help Bruce Funk fight Diebold's retaliation.

In Funk's case, the lack of public notice and failure to put his employment matter on the agenda likely outweighs the 1929 law, as does the county's refusal to provide him with counsel, failure to allow him to sit in on the private meeting with Diebold lawyers concerning his employment, and insistence that he take responsibility for elections held on machines he knew to be insecure.

To date, Emery County has refused to provide Funk with either a transcript or a tape or their behind-closed-doors meeting with Diebold attorneys.

Diebold's behavior is more problematic
Experts for the state of California and the state of Pennsylvanie have now confirmed the seriousness of the vulnerabilities discovered in Emery County. Diebold was cornered by Pennsylvania voting system examiner Michael Shamos, and was given the choice of telling the truth or lying. Shamos had already sequestered one of the machines and was prepared to examine it himself it Diebold lied. Only after this did Diebold admit to knowing about the security vulnerability, which is designed into the system.

Black Box Voting is completing reports with Harri Hursti and subsequently with Security Innovation (which will serve as peer review for Hursti Report II). The Hursti Report on findings from Emery County will detail multiple back doors built into the system. This report will be released to the public in redacted form on May 10. The unredacted version will be provided to federal and state regulators, including the Dept. of Homeland Security's "CERT" alert system.

Letter to Utah officials
Here is a quote from the preliminary information which Utah officials chose to ignore (except for locking Mr. Funk out of his office):

quote:

To: Gary Herbert, Lt. Governor of the state of Utah
Cc: David Blackwell, Emery County Attorney
Bruce Funk, Emery County Elections
Emery County Commissioners
Michael Cragun, Utah State Elections Director

Mar. 24, 2006

Dear Sirs,

This is a formal notification that a security defect was found in the Diebold TSx system in Emery County, Utah by professional security experts from Security Innovation, Inc. and Mr. Harri Hursti. Because of the severity of the defects, the formal reports are being prepared with sufficient precision to garner the attention of the appropriate authorities with jurisdiction over this matter. These authorities, of course, include each of you who are receiving this notice, in addition to federal authorities in the general area of computer security.

...

The security problems found in Emery County present potentially catastrophic security defects for upcoming elections. The issue extends outside of Emery County to additional states. The identified security vulnerability appears to be:

1) Persistent, with the ability to survive through multiple elections;

2) Difficult to detect, not only for elections official but also for security experts and even for Diebold technicians;

3) Flexible, in that the exploit can selectively affect any particular election, candidate or ballot question;

4) Accessible, in that no password, supervisor access or special equipment is needed to invoke the exploit;

5) Difficult to eradicate with any patch, reinstallation, or cleaning procedure;

6) Likely to be exploited, because the skills needed to exploit the hole are possessed by many programmers and the information needed to conduct the exploit is generally available to the public. The time needed to exploit the security hole is in the range of a week’s planning time and 60 seconds for execution.

A pattern of security failures
The testing in Emery County follows another set of tests by Black Box Voting in Leon County, Florida, which documented security flaws in the GEMS central tabulator and the Diebold AccuVote optical scan system.

A pattern of retaliation by Diebold
Like Bruce Funk, Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho faced retaliation by Diebold and other voting companies. Diebold refused to honor its contract with Sancho, forcing him out of HAVA compliance. The only other authorized vendors then blackballed Sancho, refusing to sell to him.

The Florida Attorney General is now investigating Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia for collusion and antitrust violations.

Diebold has also been participating in orchestrated smear campaigns against Black Box Voting and its founder, Bev Harris, using fake Internet "screen names," identity theft (posing as board members of Black Box Voting to post defamation, organizing fake news Web sites smearing election integrity advocates in general and Black Box Voting/Bev Harris specifically. Other Diebold employees have joined with the Diebold smear squad, which also includes an individual from North Carolina, and according to public records obtained by Black Box Voting, have colluded to point elections officials toward the cyberlibel.

Black Box Voting, together with a team of researchers, has obtained documents and photographs which directly tie these retaliatory actions to Diebold. A more detailed article on the Diebold smear campaigns will be published after the dust has settled on the Diebold touch-screen security failures.

PERMISSION TO REPRINT GRANTED, WITH LINK TO http://www.blackboxvoting.org

Return to hand count paper ballots! No other way to make them accurate. Simpler is best - return to basics. But then how many politicians are there to vote for in this one party system?

Raw story had their server relocated without their permission and it will take 24 to 48 hours for it to get back on line completely. It will help if the people closest to the server keep trying to reach it. All of the dns servers on the net have to learn the new ip address.

Brad #33 - Thanks

Wake up...I know #34 -

It seems that V. Kurt has come here to bring us some information regarding this mess. He has exposed himself as a Republican who is having some second thoughts. While he may not see things totaly "our way" I feel we should welcome him and his personal knowledge of the election process. I mean within reason people can agree to disagree. It seems he may have some things to bring to the table.

He is not at all like Paul or Ricky who come here just to stir things up, or Mike J who fills the pages with what first seems to be intelligence untill you've seen enough of it and realize it's just a bunch of hogwash.

It takes a big man to walk into a room and say I don't necessarily agree with you but here is what I have to offer.

Mr. Bellman, you don't believe the 2004 election was stolen. Do you have an explanation for the discrepancy in Pennsylvania between exit-poll results and tabulated vote? I believe it was 6%. Kerry won the state anyway, but that figure defies all the laws of probabilities. It's a mathematically
impossible number, really.

Now, consider that in the 11 battleground states, Kerry's exit-poll numbers ran well ahead of his actual vote count in 10 of them, the other being a standoff. That's equally impossible.

The only explanation given for these discrepancies is that "more Kerry voters were interviewed" by exit pollsters. That is a non-explanation, because it suggests there were more Kerry voters available to be interviewed...in other words, Kerry had more votes than Bush.

The only way to resolve the dilemma and make sense while doing it is to state the obvious: Bush's friends rigged the vote count.

Mr. Bellman:
Welcome sir! We can use all the help we can get.

Although the theft of the 2004 election is very complicated and not yet understood because of very shoddy to non-existent coverage. Most people agree that former president Jimmy Carter is an honorable man with an impecable record of election monitoring around the world.

Paste this address into you browser and hear for yourself what he had to say about the 2000 election.

http://rawstory2.com/aex...ernal/RawStoryCarter.mp3

Thank You!

Emlev #40 and Brad #41,

There's no point putting pressure on the EAC or anyone else until all the facts are available, and all the possible mitigating factors are compiled into the final report.

BBV will be making sure that the elected official in every possibly affected jurisdiction gets this. There's not much point making phone calls or sending emails on this till the FULL report is complete--at which point BBV will be sending it out.

And you know BBV--they'll make sure they don't just send it but that they also get proof of receipt. No official will be able to pretend that they never got it.

AFTER the election officials have received it is when it'll be time for citizen action and making our views known. This will be especially important in our own local areas and to local and regional media. (And of course national media as well--like BradBlog!)

The website for Bruce Funk's county seems to have already replaced him. I've got some before and after links on my site that show his page from the Google Cache. http://www.coggins.org/BruceFunk

For Robert Lockwood Mills (@#39),

Okay, I can see why you feel the way you do. I had the unfortunate experience of observing NEP's people and methods in PA, and I believe their work was pretty shoddy, at least here. In my COUNTY, it was abysmal. I wouldn't trust ANYTHING they got out of here. But I refuse to extrapolate beyond my county and state, because that would just be speculation on my part, and not particularly fair. What it DOES DO is make what I've read about NEP's failures elsewhere at least PLAUSIBLE to me.

I agree that the PA exit poll to actual results swing is sizable, along with others, but you must remember that electronic voting existed in PA in only VERY few counties in 2004, and they not only went HUGE for Kerry when taken as a whole, but went WAY above Democratic registration in those areas. In short, in Pennsylvania, Kerry's "best friend" was the electronic vote.

The areas where Bush won and outperformed his Republican voter registration were overwhelmingly lever, punchcard and optical scan counties, places with "documents". In fact, in those few areas where traditionally hand counted paper was used, Bush could almost have been said to pitch a near shutout.

In addition, the areas with ridiculously long lines to vote in PA, where many voters left in disgust, were among the most heavily Republican areas, for the most part.

In short, all the things that happened in Ohio that benefitted Bush, could be said to have benefitted Kerry in PA.

In Philadelphia, where they use the one electronic system that I like quite a lot, Republicans frequently finish THIRD in many precincts, behind the Democratic AND Green Party candidates.

Sounds to me as if there was fraud on both sides in Pennsylvania (unlike in Ohio). But Kerry ran 6% ahead in the exit polls vs. his tablulated vote in your state, so whatever factors benefited him in Pennsylvania (as opposed to Ohio) didn't translate into actual votes...quite the opposite, in fact.

I'm absolutely convinced that votes were flipped en masse, probably at central tabulators rather than in individual machines. There's no way to explain a 6% discrepancy without violating the laws of probability...and the factors you cite, Mr. Bellman, would even make the discrepancy larger than 6%.

Some day this will all come out in the wash. And if any good can be said to emerge from it, maybe the macho tradition of "Accept the results, don't be a sore loser" will go the way of the buggy whip and hula hoop.

Not to beat a dead horse, but we don't apply a "...don't be a sore loser" standard to foreign governments who rig their elections. On the contrary, we send Colin Powell, Condi Rice, and Jimmy Carter over there to remind Ukraine and Belarus that "diplomatic relations between our countries will be negatively impacted by this fraudulent election outcome." Arrogance. Pure, unbridled American arrogance. That's all it is. We can have nuclear weapons, but other countries can't...because we're the United States of America. We can rig our elections, but no other country can...because we're the United States of America, the world's role model.

Except, of course, when we invade sovereign countries that aren't threatening us, torture prisoners, spy illegally on our own citizens, and lie about all of it afterwards.

Welcome Mr. Bellman. It's great to have more input on the issues under discussion.

I think that both the elections of 2000 and 2004 were stolen, but it's not a proven thing. There just seem to be a lot of indicators pointing in that direction.

Though I suppose one can question whether an election was stolen when the person stolen from, Kerry, doesn't seem to mind. I guess the answer to that would be that the votes were stolen not from Kerry, perhaps, but from voters (assuming they were stolen).

V. Kurt Bellman #11, #24

You said you are a republican. Evidently you realize most here are not. In another thread I noticed awhile ago on this blog, a long list of "republican" sexual arrests were listed (link here), I pointed out that these are not "republican" sexual arrests, these are human behavior problems with no nexus to political affiliation (link here). Just so you know, I like to keep things as straight as possible. I do not like unfairness that way.

But I do not pull any punches when it comes to identifying this regime as a republican dictatorship. I do not limit the definition of "dictatorship" to the ancient concept based upon the behavior of Hitler, Musolini, or Stalin. Instead, my definition of a dictatorship is any mechanism or process that thrwarts the will of the people when they want to make changes to their government thru their votes ... and for any reason are prevented from doing so.

IMO when the president is rubber stamped by a congress of the same party, and the polls shout that the people are not with them, and it cannot be changed thru checks and balances, the only thing remaining to change from a dictatorship mode is an election. And if the government cannot be changed by an election, then a dictatorship is in place. That is the reality in modern times like ours as John Gideon, Brad, BBV, and the bloggers here are pointing out in the analogy to a train wreck.

I would like to ask you what your take is on exit polling. The trolls that post here go into hysterics when any phrase contains the word "poll", so they tend not to distinguish the science from the bunk.

Exit poll science provides tools that have been used for decades successfully. Accurate predictions are the legacy of these tools.

The 2000 and 2004 official election results were at odds with the exit poll predictions for the first time and for the first time electronic voting machines were used.

Those doing the polls, Edison/Mitofsky, were of the popular mindset "it can't happen here". This mindset is not prepared to entertain any notion of election fraud as the reason for the massive first time discrepancies.

They instead offered the explanation that "republicans were more shy than democrats" and that is why the massive discrepancy. They did not even consider vote fraud.

A study done by 8 Phd's and one MS pointed this out and that fraud must not be ruled out (link here). They said:

"3. Inaccurate Election Results

Edison/Mitofsky did not even consider this hypothesis, and thus made no effort to contradict it. Some of Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data may be construed as affirmative evidence for inaccurate election results. We conclude that the hypothesis that the voters’ intent was not accurately recorded or counted [fraud]cannot be ruled out and needs further investigation" (ibid. at page 3, bold added).

Other experts have said: "Flaws in any of these aspects of a voting system, however, can lead to indecisive or incorrect election results" (link here).

Edison/Mitofsky and the MSM, who used the data, can't bear to even consider that America could be corrupted in its election processes.

A position entirely at odds with common sense and scientific inquiry, which does not rule out ... before starting the test ... any particular potential result the evidence may point to.

Are you of the same opinion, that the only thing exit poll discrepancy can not be attributed to ... is wrong final tallies by the election officials?

Blogging and commenting is all fun and good, but what you people have to understand is that all of this info will NEVER, NEVER, EVER see the light of the MSM.

With that in mind, I believe that if the Democrats DO NOT take back the House and Senate in November, Americans will either have to stand up or shut up. Only protests and removal of administration liars by force - by the people - will save the nation.

Anyone who thinks that the 2006 elections will be any cleaner than 2000 or 2004 is simply "whistlin' Dixie." The fix is already in and despite the valiant and heroic efforts of people like Brad and Bev, there's no way around the theft of these upcoming elections.

America was hijacked in 2000. Don't believe for a moment that they're about to give it back. We're screwed, been screwed and it's probably going to have to get a lot worse before it gets any better.

Boo-yah!

Epppie #47

You bring up a most excellent observation. One everyone should subscribe to.

That is, elections do not belong to anyone except the people.

It does not matter whether or not a campaigner or an election official thinks an election was improperly conducted to the point of thwarting the will of the voters ... what matters is what the people think about it.

It is the same with search and seizure issues ... the constitution says a warrant must be used and issued only upon probable cause.

Some dorks say "I am not worried because I did nothing wrong and so search me I don't care about warrants". They think they can do away with the constitution (4th Amendment) simply because they think they have nothing to fear by a government that can search or seize anytime it feels like it.

Same with voting ... if the people think something is wrong it does not matter what the candidates or election officials think ... what the people think is the fulcrum of the issue.

"We're screwed, been screwed and it's probably going to have to get a lot worse before it gets any better." Boo-yah

Yes, we are, if we don't do anything. Everyone that is worried about election fraud should get involved with their local election process, and try to affect changes. Don't just sit around and moan - do something!

DREDD,

I really don't have the time to go into a long explanation of where I stand regarding the NEP's polling failures, so what I'm offering here is a "Reader's Digest Condensed Version", with all the limitations that implies.

If you want a pretty extensive version of what I believe, see www.mysterypollster.com. I tend to give a lot of credence to Democrats who opine opposite of what you'd expect from Democrats, and similarly situated Republicans who buck the trend of what you'd expect from them. That's just the way I think.

I witnessed first hand what E/M or NEP folks were doing in my area, and it makes me dubious of their data elsewhere. In my area, the NEP exit poll takers VASTLY oversampled Democratic precincts, oversampled Democrats within each precinct, and generally looked and behaved in a way that would be instantly "off-putting" to any conservative Republican. I EVEN witnessed an NEP exit poll taker with Kerry/Edwards buttons on, contrary to the standards given by Edison Mitofsky.

All wore shirts boldly emblazoned with the logos of AP and the major TV networks. Now where I live, that's analogous to waving a red flag before a bull, when presenting to, say, a Rush Limbaugh fan. I do believe that there was a large "refusal to participate" among Limbaugh-esque Republicans, and Limbaugh "owns" the Noon to 3 time slot in my area.

That's why I believe the official "differential participation" explanation of events.

Kurt, re: the peculiar results in some areas of PA, these should be investigated regardless of who apparently benefitted.

Optical scan results are highly questionable for several reasons. Just because they use paper doesn't mean the paper is ever used for a count--especially as you've commented that it's very difficult to get a recount in PA.