Saturday 3/5 Election Fraud, Reform, & Updates Thread

Video in Real Media format (7 minutes)
Note: this video clip has been edited for length

Video in Real Media format (3 minutes)
Note: this video clips has been edited for length

Video in Real Media format (6 minutes)

(dialup version)

Video in Real Media format (6 minutes)
Note: this video clip has been edited for length

She calls them "social fundamentalist". Rove calls them "evangelicals".
Also, her thoughts on Hillary Clinton in 2008



Video in Real Media format (9 minutes)
Note: this video clip has been edited for length

Also, blogs buzz about Sen. Reid's comment: "Greenspan is a... partisan hack."



Video in Real Media format (3 minutes)

Oregon Counties' switch to mail-voting could hasten under bill that passed Senate

Counties will have an easier time switching to mail-only voting under a bill that passed the Senate Friday, after vigorous debate from opponents who said it will take away people's right to vote at the polls and decrease the security of votes.

The measure passed 32-16 and now heads to the House.

While the bill doesn't require the entire state to vote by mail, as Oregon chose to do in 1998, it may hasten the process by giving counties the option of eliminating poll sites. That provision led some to argue that voters will have fewer choices.

...
But some lawmakers said that proving voter legitimacy is harder with absentee ballots.

Sen. James Hargrove, D-Hoquiam, said "it comes down to deciding whether we're going to have accurate elections or have fast-food easy elections."

"I think in a few years I'm going to be saying I told you so when we have some massive fraud because we don't know who's voting in all those mail-in ballots," he said.

Butterfingering America's Vote

Yes, partisan politics has hit America in such a way that those who are in charge of our most trusted institution, our vote, have become corrupt in their own social views.

...
But most disturbing is what happened this last election in the state of Ohio, when that state's Secretary of State, J. Kenneth Blackwell, certified the vote even with doubt of the legitimacy of electronic voting machines, which might have been malfunctioning. Many of the questionable machines were manufactured by Diebold Corporation, whose CEO, Wally O'Dell, was a keep donor to the Bush campaign. But then the shadow of doubt begins to drift when it is realized that Blackwell was also an integral part of the campaign to re-elect Bush in Ohio and will need the President's help to win the states Gubernatorial seat in 2006.

Every single one of them, on both sides of the aisle, took advantage of the system and our vote. They placed their own future before the future of this nation.

And how can we end this? By stopping party and corporate funds from flowing into this state held post, but until then we can only rely on our own good judgment to realize that those who hold such a public position should be fair and objective.

Kerry: Something Wrong With Media

Still smarting from his election defeat last year, Sen. John Kerry blasted the mainstream media during a panel discussion at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library earlier this week, saying they had contributed to an atmosphere of fear and lies.

"There is something wrong with who is arbitrating the truth," he said, according to Boston's Daily Free Press. "When fear is dominating the discussion, we have a problem."

Kerry said news conglomerates - particularly of broadcast news - were a large part of the problem.

"The corporatization of the media has taken away some of the muckraking," he complained.

Democratics scold GOP for publicly accusing people of illegal voting

State Democrats scolded the GOP on Friday for publicly accusing more than 1,000 people of voting illegally in the extremely close governor's race won by Democrat Christine Gregoire, saying the Republicans didn't take the time to check out the details.

...
Republicans have "gone from smearing the candidates to smearing the voters," attorney David McDonald, voting manager for the state Democratic Party, said Friday, alleging that it would have taken just a few minutes per name to establish the facts.

The Associated Press contacted three of those on the alleged felon list. Two said their voting rights had been restored and one said he was pulled over for drunken driving in 2003, but the charge was reduced. Two of those three said they voted for Rossi.

...
Democrats plan to check the entire list against precinct records, he said.

Maisano & Abinanti Begin Bipartisan Effort To Reform New York Election Law

White Plains, NY - Highlighting the growing concern across the country about the conduct of elections, Westchester County Legislators Jim Maisano (R-New Rochelle) and Tom Abinanti (D-Greenburgh) have announced a bipartisan effort to review the way New York elections are conducted and to propose reforms.

"The current legal and procedural framework for holding elections contains major inadequacies and often defies common sense," stated Legislator Maisano. "No candidate should ever run for office worrying about whether the election will be fairly conducted. Washington and Albany have dropped the ball on election reform."

"Fair elections are what our country is all about," noted Legislator Abinanti. "People have lost faith in our election processes and are frustrated by all of the flaws that they see."

The Legislators are researching several election reform issues and are planning four public meetings to hear the concerns of Westchester residents, political party workers, former candidates and good government groups. The meetings are tentatively scheduled for March 28, April 4, April 12 and April 18 at locations to be announced. The Legislators hope to issue a report in May 2005 with recommendations for action by the Westchester and New York State Legislatures for reforming elections.

Hannity Asks," Will Ex Cons Get Hillary Into Office?"

Hannity went after Hillary Clinton tonight because of the Bill sponsored by Hillary, John Kerry and Barbara Boxer that would allow ex felons to vote. Hannity told viewers to thank liberal Democrats when they are forced to stand in line to vote with rapists asking, "Will ex cons get Hillary into office?" 3/4/05

Patrick McHenry, R. claimed that it was a purely partisan move to get votes for the Democrats since most of the ex felons are Democrats. Then McHenry quickly tried to discredit Philadelphia Congressman Chaka Fattah, D. claiming he had no right to talk about voter reform since Philadelphia has investigations pending in that area.

Fattah was rightfully annoyed and answered that this entire story was just a distraction because the Republicans have control and the bill will never be passed anyway. Hannity could be heard in the backghround arrogantly expressing his agreement. Fattah let Hannity and McGovern know that they had insulted Philadelphia, the seat of the Constitution.Hannity replied with his smug tone of superiority, " Now you're insinuating things that were never implied but I'd expect that from you." McHenry joined in with, "If you want child rapists and people guilty of brutal assaults voting in your city..."

Fattah got the last word informing viewers that the two Governors who allowed felons to vote were Jeb and George W Bush.

Comments: Just your routine segment for Hannity full of distortion, deception, and vicious Republican behavior. The hysterical hatred spewing from McHenry and Hannity reveals the immense fear they have of the Democratic Party which has always represented the true values of the American majority. Maybe Republicans should ask themselves why people who have struggled in life, vote Democratic.Unfortunatly, I don't think they really give a damn as long as they keep quiet and don't vote.

Is U.S. Ministry of Propaganda Next?

It is needless to say that this is not the first presidential administration to produce news broadcasts extolling its own policies. Governments around the world—Putin’s Russia, North Korea, China, Afghanistan, Cuba, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and others--have also been involved in this unsavory activity, but where those undemocratic governments are concerned the practice is correctly identified as "misleading propaganda."

Furthermore, the Bush-Cheney administration has not been content merely to make up its own bogus news. It has paid off ostensibly legitimate opinion makers who were trusted by many to be truthful in their dissemination of crucial information to the public. As example, earlier this year, it was revealed that agencies connected to the executive branch paid columnists--with taxpayer money--to adopt certain favorable stances on selected issues the Rush-Cheney administration was pushing.

...
But even having journalists in outside news organizations on their payroll was not enough for the Bush-Cheney White House. A republican activist decided to carry their scheme of disinformation even further by creating an in-house ringer. The activist through his website GOPUSA.com and subsequently Talon News employed the services of one James Guckert, alias "Jeff Gannon," to put a Bush-friendly face in the White House briefing room. Guckert/Gannon, whose most notable previous experience allegedly included working as a male homosexual prostitute through the Internet, was employed to play the part of a journalist during White House news briefings. Gannon/Guckert accomplished the task within the White House press corps of helping to throw off and forestall any tough questioning by legitimate journalists.

...
While it is not generally helpful or productive to compare our government in Washington to dictatorial governments in other countries, the misconduct on the part of our executive branch makes it difficult to keep visions of a certain European government’s propaganda ministry (during the period of America’s Greatest Generation) from intruding on the thoughts of those of us aware of the problem.

Bush lawyer defends Swift Boat ads

Former Bush-Cheney counsel
Benjamin Ginsburg speaks in
Moulton Union yesterday about his
involvement with the Swift Boat
ad controversy.


Bowdoin students proved during the 2004 election that they don't shy away from controversy—and they didn't shy away last night as a good number of students attended Benjamin Ginsberg's lecture, "Red States, Blue States, and Swift Boat Vets: An Inside Look at the 2004 Election."

Benjamin Ginsberg resigned as national counsel to the Bush-Cheney campaign amid a storm of controversy surrounding his connections to the advocacy organization Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

When asked by the Orient what he would say to students who may be turned away from politics by negativity in campaigns, Ginsberg replied that students should consider that "these are the people who are going to be running your government...negativity is a part of politics, and sometimes it helps get your candidate elected."

Prior to the 2004 election, Ginsberg served as national counsel to Bush-Cheney campaign in 2000, and played a central role in the Florida recount in the 2000 election. Among other things, he also currently represents the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and the National Congressional Committee.

Warriors for voting rights keep up fight
40 years after Selma, a new call for vigilance

Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) (left) and the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth walk a
wreath Friday from Birmingham's Kelly Ingram Park to the front of the
Sixteenth Street Baptist Church.


BIRMINGHAM — Amid the settings of the civil rights movement that fought for voting rights 40 years ago, members of a congressional delegation said Friday the struggle continues and could escalate during the next two years in Washington.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act — enacted after a violent confrontation between nonviolent marchers and white policemen at the foot of the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala. — is coming up for reauthorization in Congress at a time when African-Americans, Hispanics and other minorities say they once again face intimidation and suppression at polling places.

"We know in America (today) that voting rights are not assured for every American, that's what this pilgrimage is all about," Rep. Steney Hoyer (D-Md.) told nearly 150 VIPs who began a three-day tour of civil rights landmarks Friday in Alabama.

Numbering among its members 37 representatives and senators, Democrats and Republicans, the group is led by U.S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Atlanta). As head of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, he was a leader of the 1965 Selma march and nearly died from the beating he suffered at the hands of police and state troopers there.

Democratic National Committee Announces Ohio Election Review Team

Washington, D.C. – The Democratic National Committee (DNC) announced the members of its Ohio Election Task Force. This group of seasoned professionals in the electoral and technology fields are taking an in-depth look into the issues of voter registration problems, long lines at the polls, the issuance and counting of provisional ballots and voting equipment irregularities that voters faced during the 2004 presidential election in Ohio. The team has been hard at work since January, conducting surveys and reviewing election data from all across the state. The task force will submit its report to the DNC with suggestions for moving forward.

"I am confident that Voting Rights Institute (VRI) Chair Donna Brazile and her team of experts will properly investigate what went wrong in the Ohio election process," said DNC Chairman Governor Howard Dean. "This investigation will ensure that every vote will be counted and everyone who is eligible to vote will be able to secure that right."

"This team is hard at work, analyzing voting irregularities," said VRI Chair Brazile. "We are putting the efforts and resources into this project because it is vital that we find out what went wrong, how we can fix it, and restore the faith of the American people in our voting system."

Bush Sets Up Social Security 'War Room'

WASHINGTON — A new Social Security war room inside the Treasury Department is pumping out information to sell President Bush's plan, much like any political campaign might do.

It's part of a coordinated effort by the Bush administration. The internal, taxpayer-funded campaigning is backed up by television advertisements, grass-roots organizing and lobbying from business and other groups that support the Bush plan.

The president's opponents are organized too, though they do not enjoy the resources of the White House or Treasury to sell their message.

For the administration, the communications effort is being coordinated out of Treasury's public affairs office through the new Social Security Information Center. Three people have been hired, with two more hires possible soon. The first three employees are veterans of the Bush-Cheney campaign or the Republican National Committee.

Editorial: Media and democracy

James Madison warned more than two centuries ago, "A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives."

...
American media have become a cesspool of political spin, product placement and celebrity gossip. Popular information that matters, and the means of acquiring it, is being choked off by the handful of corporations that have come to control the vast majority of American broadcast and print communications. And the consolidation of media ownership - about which the founder of this newspaper, William T. Evjue, began warning in 1917 - is growing dramatically more problematic.

In other words, Madison is being proven right as we watch and listen and read media that serve the interests of the powerful and wealthy while denying the vast majority of American citizens the power that knowledge gives. The tragedy is evident in a war that was sold as both easy and necessary but that continues to claim Iraqi and American lives and that it emptying the public treasury of the funds that should pay for schools, health care and other basic needs. The farce is evident in the Bush presidency, which continues despite the evidence of deceit, mismanagement and a worldview so warped that it has made America a more hated country than at any time in her history.

If America had better media, we would have a better president. And we would not be stuck in the quagmire that is Iraq.

The press and the new order, again

The press and the new order, again. Jay Rosen takes another stab this morning at thinking his way through what he calls the "de-certifying" of the press in the Bush/Rove era. Here's the core of the post:

"It's been apparent since the day he took office... that George Bush has little love for the press," (Howard) Kurtz writes. But what wasn't apparent, at first, was the different philosophy of press relations the Bush White House held, and advertised that it held. Why have a different theory, why talk openly about it, if you intend no changes in practice?

There is no Fourth Estate, says the Bush Thesis. The White House press has no check and balance function. As for journalists, "they don't represent the public any more than other people do," according to Chief of Staff Andrew Card. "In our democracy, the people who represent the public stood for election."

Of course the whole idea of having a White House press corps is that the reporters in it do represent the American public's common interest in seeing executive power questioned, monitored, examined, explained. The President needs an interlocutor, it was thought.

Keep in mind how often it has been observed that the British have the ritual of Question Time in Parliament--where the Prime Minister must answer the opposition-- while the U.S. has the White House press conference to serve a roughly similar goal. Maybe it doesn't serve very well, but on the other hand if the press does not have an accepted right to question time with the President, who does?

This is the most disturbing part of the entire pattern: To answer questions from informed people who might doubt him is not an essential responsibility that Bush, as President, feels he even has.

The reference to Question Time is helpful: it grounds what I meant in my Wednesday post on this topic, when I talked about a change being under way that redefines the constitutional position of the press. The interlocutory function of the White House press is, obviously, unspecified and unimagined in the text of the Constitution: but the White House press conference represents an enactment, a practical interpretation (one of the most visible and significant of the past era), of the meaning of the First Amendment guarantee of press freedom—and its association of the freedoms of conscience with the right to seek redress from the government. Understanding this aspect of the issue is crucial if you're going to form theory about it.

What Jay Rosen isn't seeing—what isn't being seen generally yet, which is why I'm repeating myself here—is that one constitutional order doesn't pass away without another taking its place. Rosen is focused entirely on the negative moment of the "de-certifying" of the press, which he approaches as a kind of distressing mystery. That's an artifact of a weak theoretical foundation.

Bush doesn't simply refuse to hold the press conferences his predecessors held. His press secretaries don't simply practice a global obfuscation that renders their daily briefings exercises in futility. Bush takes questions from a "Jeff Gannon." His administration suborns "professional" journalists, like Armstrong Williams, to create propaganda for its programs. It broadcasts its messages, all but unedited, through the cheerleading medium of a Fox or a "Talon" News. The institutional, "objective" press is not simply being de-certified. A parallel press, one with a rigid ideological mission, is being set up against it, and drawn into an ever tighter governmental embrace. This controlled press, funded through the deep (and still half-secret) financial networks of the Right, ideologically coordinated through its "scholarly" institutions, staffed by "professionals" schooled less in journalism than in the disinformation tactics of public relations, has now become an arm of Republican government. It is already in a position, with its extension into the blogspace—as the muscle-flexings of Rathergate and the Eason Jordan affair have demonstrated—to exert a powerful disciplinary pressure against the as-yet unaffiliated, neutral press. Indeed, that's now the primary job of the controlled press, to beat the uncontrolled press into submission. This is a movement that clearly marks, and is clearly intended to establish, a deep change in the constitutional relation between the Executive and the press, and with it the social means of opinion formation as a whole.

We are emerging into a new constitutional era, the era of the controlled press. Will any of the professional journalists who still believe they work in the former era manage to figure this out before they're finally ushered into history?

Unpopular from Coast to Coast (Continued)

Yesterday, I reviewed several recent polls that show how public opinion is turning against Bush and, particularly, his proposal to privatize Social Security. Bad as these polls are for Bush, perhaps the bleakest news for him is in the just-released CBS News/New York Times poll. Here are the key findings:

1. Bush's overall approval rating is 49 percent, his rating on Iraq is 45 percent and his rating on foreign policy is 44 percent. Bad, but par for the course for Bush these days. More startling, this poll has his approval rating on the economy down to 38 percent, with 54 percent disapproval. That's only a couple of points above his worst rating in this poll, indicating that the public may be losing patience with the continued failure of the Bush recovery to generate robust growth. And Bush's approval rating on the federal budget deficit is a miserable 29 percent, with 60 percent disapproval.

2. The poll asked respondents whether they thought Bush had the same or different priorities as most Americans on two different types of issues. On foreign policy issues, 58 percent thought he had different priorities and only 37 percent thought he had the same priorities. And on domestic issues, the verdict was a substantially more negative 63 percent different/31 percent same. And we are supposed to believe that Bush is somehow in tune with the American people, even if his party is not? Not by the evidence of this poll.

3. Slightly more people say they are uneasy with Bush's ability to handle an international crisis than say they are confident (51-47)--hardly a ringing endorsement. But that looks robust compared to 63 percent uneasy/31 percent confident judgement on Bush's ability to make the right decisions on Social Security.

4. On abortion and legal recognition of gay or same sex couples, people say the Democrats are closer to their views than the Republicans by margins of 5-10 points. And Democrats are favored by 17 points (48-31) as the party more likely to make the right decisions about Social Security.

5. The poll asked:

Some people have suggested allowing individuals to invest portions of their Social Security taxes on their own, which might allow them to make more money for their retirement, but would involve greater risk. Do you think allowing individuals to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes on their own is a good idea or a bad idea?

That wording returned a 51 percent bad idea/43 percent good idea judgement--the most negative response yet on this question, which was first asked in May, 2000. Moreover, consistent with other recent polls, the question has been following a downward trajectory as Bush has pushed his privatization proposal to the fore.

Followup questions reduce the number saying individual accounts are a good idea to 22 percent, if guaranteed benefits are cut, and to 17 percent, if the accounts would increase the federal budget deficit.

6. The public overwhelmingly believes individual accounts would not have a positive impact on Social Security's financial situation. Only 19 percent believe such accounts would make Social Security's financial situation better, while 69 percent believe it would either make it worse (45 percent) or have no impact (24 percent).

7. Currently, 50 percent believe the US should have stayed out of Iraq, compared to 46 percent who believe the US did the right thing in taking military action. That's only the second time the "stay out" figure has broken 50 percent--more evidence that the failure of the Iraqi elections to substantially change the facts on the ground in Iraq is feeding into a jaundiced view of the US intervention. And people are actually less convinced now than they were before the November election that Bush has a clear plan for dealing with the Iraq situation (71 percent now believe he doesn't, while only 21 percent believe he does).

8. Bush is continuing his long-term work of alienating the political center. That didn't quite kill him in 2004, but this trend can't be good for the GOP's future prospects and the hopes they harbor of creating a new political majority.

In this poll, Bush's overall approval rating among independents is 42 percent. Among the same group, his rating on Iraq is 42 percent, on foreign policy, 40 percent, on the economy, 33 percent and on the federal budget deficit, 23 percent.

And on Social Security, it is extraordinary how close the views of Democrats and independents are on most key issues and how far apart both are from Republicans. Bush is completely losing the battle for the middle on this one.

For example, independents reject private accounts by 56-37, fairly close to the 63-31 opposition among Democrats. But Republicans support them by 65-28, a huge gap. Similarly, just 14 percent of independents and of Democrats think individual accounts would be a good idea, even if guaranteed benefits were cut, while almost three times as many Republicans (40 percent) think so.

While Bush did just manage to squeak by in 2004, despite the many ways he alienated the political center, he and his party are likely to pay a considerable price for this approach as the Social Security struggle unfolds and we move toward 2006 and 2008.

Offensive Charm
Stockholm Syndrome and the American media

The American media was given their talking points about Bush's excellent European adventure by Karl Rove and gosh darn if they didn't stick with the script. Herr Rove instructed them to characterize Bush's trip as a "charm offensive" organized to "mend fences" with our erstwhile unshakable allies. And, like good doormats, the journalists let the "leader of the free world" walk all over them.

As one astute poster on a SmirkingChimp.com forum put it, "Good Morning America ran a bit about Bush's trip to Europe ... and host Charles Gibson essentially said this: 'President Bush today continues his European tour as he attempts to mend fences with allied leaders and outlines his plan to spread democracy to the Middle East. Interestingly, a new poll shows two-thirds of Europeans disagree with Bush's plan.' Translation: Two-thirds of Europeans don't want people in the Middle East to be free."

Never mind if Rove's talking points bear no resemblance to the truth on the ground in Europe; the media does what it's told. Bush is no more mending fences than I am winning the hearts and minds of fundamentalist end-timers. Let's face it. He's blown it with the only power bloc we've been able to count on since World War II, our largest trading partner and investor. Europe is now not only chafing at Bush's unilateral approach to diplomacy -- my way or the highway -- the EU is having serious doubts about whether the U.S. is even a sound investment. According to Felix Rohatyn in the Wall Street Journal, we need "$2 billion per day of foreign capital to service our debt, when the dollar is losing value regularly in the marketplace, and when the overall net flow of foreign money into American stocks and bonds has fallen sharply." Most of what's keeping us afloat is European money. They could call in their chips any time they want.

...
I have a theory about why this is. And, since we're on the subject of Europe, I'll offer it: Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? It's a psychological condition peculiar to kidnap or abuse victims in which they begin to sympathize with their captors or abusers. In some cases, Stockholm Syndrome victims will actually help the captors with their crimes (think Patty Hearst), and after the hostage situation has been resolved and they've been freed, the victims will defend their abusers in the press and even refuse to testify against them in legal proceedings (think of all the chronically abused wives who call off the legal dogs). The syndrome gets its name from a 1973 bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, in which customers were held hostage for days inside the bank.

The American press has shown symptoms of this syndrome since the 2000 election, when the skeleton army in Bush's closet was overlooked while Al Gore was viciously attacked for the color of his sweaters and his sighs. But, the syndrome kicked in full-blown after 9/11. Since then, the White House has been a conduit of mendacity and maliciousness the likes of which we've never known in American history, and the reporters just take it all in, then rewrite Rove's press releases by deadline time.

Support the Count Every Vote Act

It's old news, actually, but Senators Clinton, Kerry, Boxer, Mikulski, and Lautenberg have introduced a bill in the Senate called the "Count Every Vote Act." The bill addresses a great number of the flaws in this country's election process that the last several elections have revealed. The People for the American Way web site summarizes the 65-page bill's provisions as follows:

More Accountable and Accessible Voting Systems

The Count Every Vote Act would:

1. Require that all voting systems produce a paper record that can be verified by the individual voter and that would constitute the official record for any recount;
   
2. Require a mandatory recount of voter-verified paper records in 2 percent of all polling places or precincts in each state;
   
3. Set minimum standards for the number of voting systems and poll workers at each precinct, and require that every precinct have at least one machine that can provide audio and pictorial verification and that is accessible to language minority voters;
   
4. Establish new security standards for voting equipment manufacturers, including a ban on using undisclosed software and wireless communications devices in voting systems.

More Opportunities for Citizens to Register to Vote and Cast Their Ballots

The Count Every Vote Act would:

1. Allow voters to register and cast a ballot on election day;
   
2. Require states to provide in-person early voting opportunities before Election Day;
   
3. Prohibit states from demanding excuses from voters who request absentee ballots;
   
4. Give voters more options for proving their identity to election officials;
   
5. Prohibit election officials from rejecting voter registration applications that are missing information which has no effect on the specific voter's eligibility.

Discourage Partisan Manipulation and Deceptive Practices in Elections

The Count Every Vote Act would:

1. Make certain federal election campaign activities off limits to chief state election officials and top-level executives and owners of voting system manufacturers;
   
2. Require states to act in a uniform and transparent manner when attempting to purge voters from state registration lists;
   
3. Provide for the prosecution of those who engage in deceptive practices to keep people from voting in federal elections.

Expand the Right to Vote

The Count Every Vote Act would:

1. Require states to allow ex-felons who have completed their prison, parole and probation terms to register and vote in federal elections.

Ensure That All Votes Are Counted

The Count Every Vote Act would:

1. Require that provisional ballots be counted state-wide, allowing voters who are registered in a state but cast provisional ballots in a wrong precinct to still have their votes counted for all eligible federal races.

There's actually more, including the excellent idea of making federal election days federal holidays.

I don't even want to discuss the political points to be scored here, or guess how likely it is that the bill will pass. I'm very pleased and proud that leading Democrats are putting this bill forward, but these are ideas that deserve your support whether you're a Republican, a Democrat, or anything else. I've supported paper receipts for electronic voting for a while now, and just to see that issue acknowledged in Congress is great, to say nothing of the high-powered support it's getting. Standards for voting systems and poll workers per precinct are also long overdue.

You can keep posted about the bill's progress and learn about how else to help get it passed at the People for the American Way web site. Again, though, I hope this won't be seen as a "liberal" or "Democratic" issue, because I'd like this stuff to pass, and obviously the numbers won't work if it's just Democrats supporting this.

Hunter S. Thompson and the 9/11 attacks. A conspiracy?

The Globe and Mail had, on page F9 a few weeks ago a short article about Hunter S. Thompson, who apparently was writing an expose -type book or piece on the 9/11 WTC demolitions.

Hunter telephoned me on Feb. 19, the night before his death. He sounded scared. It wasn't always easy to understand what he said, particularly over the phone, he mumbled, yet when there was something he really wanted you to understand, you did. He'd been working on a story about the World Trade Center attacks and had stumbled across what he felt was hard evidence showing the towers had been brought down not by the airplanes that flew into them but by explosive charges set off in their foundations. Now he thought someone was out to stop him publishing it: "They're gonna make it look like suicide," he said. "I know how these bastards think . . ."

The New York Post also talks about it on March 4, "suicide fuels conspiracy buzz".

There was a spent shell casing, but although there were six bullets left in the gun's clip, there was no bullet in the firing chamber, as there should have been under normal circumstances.

There was also a power down around the WTC buildings a couple of days before. Also see the video, "New York Firefighters Discuss Bombs in WTC Towers"

Funny, the Lone Gunman (X-Files spinoff) pilot episode on 3/2001 was about a WTC/airplane conspiracy.

The only conspiracy here is that the secret government wants a story on the WTC buildings being demolished by Bush & co. so that you won't think about his love monkey, Jeff Gannon.

Former minister in Ukraine found shot dead
(Two Shots Doth Not A Suicide Make)

We just love this one, especially if you're currently in the market for "gallows humor:" After two weeks of Hunter Thompson speculations, here's a twice-wounded suicide, a former minister of the interior for that much intrigued neighbor of the Russian Bear, the Ukraine, and the assistant prosecutor is quoted as informing the Ukraine Pravda's reporter about the death: "First, he shot himself in the chin. The bullet came out near his nose. The he shot himself in the temple." That sounds unnecessarily redundant, not to say painful: I guess we've just been seeing, back here on the home fronts, the garden variety of suicidizations. This one really takes the cake: the despondent one, a former minister, goes down to his workshop and shoots himself first in the chin, then finding that that only clears his sinuses, and does not achieve the desired result, THEN he shoots himself in the temple. I hope this kind of thing does not become too fashionable: multiple self-inflicted gunshot
wounds. If it keeps up, some of these people could REALLY hurt themselves......

Paxxx, JE
PS We note that there is ample evidence of massive vote fixing in the Ukraine. And, they didn't get it right the first time, so they just kept on votin' till they got the desired result. Though never paranoid, by nature, some might accuse us of such, when we consider that the now victorious, after several revotes, President of the Ukraine, he of the blighted complexion, was really dioxin-poisoned by agents of the West, if you ask yourself "cui bono?" Why would the "West" do a thing like that, you ask? It's really very simple: why not? It hits two birds with the same stone: you terrorize the man you want to win, and create tremendous sympathy in those who don't really know what's going on. A freebie: you smear the "commies" who have legitimately won, as being murkily behind the plot to poison, when in fact, they asked, quite plausibly, "Why in the world would we do that. How could that help us?" It didn't. They lost, albeit on the third go round. Now "our" guy is the Prez.
They say the dioxin blotching effects wear off after several years...............

---

Fri Mar 4, 3:27 PM ET

Former minister in Ukraine found shot dead

KIEV (AFP) - Ukraine's former interior minister apparently shot himself dead with two shots to the head, hours before he was due to be questioned over the grisly murder of a reporter, a deputy prosecutor was quoted as saying.

The authorities described the death as a suicide.

...
"First, he shot himself in the chin, the bullet came out near his nose. Then he shot himself in the right temple," assistant prosecutor Victor Shokin was quoted as saying by online newspaper Ukrainska Pravda.

...
The 53-year-old minister was found hours before he was due to appear at the prosecutor's office to answer questions over the 2000 murder of investigative reporter Georgy Gongadze, whose headless body was found in woods outside Kiev.

Lingering doubts about New Mexico's Secretary of State

We talked in December about New Mexico Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron (D), and plainly visible conflicts of interest in her close association with the electronic voting industry.

In 2004, Bush carried New Mexico by only 11,000 votes. New Mexico was selected by the minor party coalition as a good candidate for their investigative recount effort -- and were turned back after repeated attempts by an openly obstructive state government.

But it's not over yet. That 'conflict of interest' we were talking about looks less and less hypothetical with each passing day:

Stewart described how at different stages in 2004's post-election recount, the (New Mexico) Secretary of State provided contradictory data sets of supposedly 'certified votes.' Initially, the provisional ballot count was not released because "a vendor" had the data, Stewart said he was told. When Stewart said he finally obtained those figures in early January, the fuller data set didn't match what he was given after the election. "The numbers were different," Stewart said. "I called the Bureau of Elections back. They said that is not possible. The vendor provided it all to us."

...The state has the nation's highest 'undercount rate,' meaning thousands of votes for president did not register, and therefore were not counted. Stewart said the state's electronic voting machines produced the largest number of undercounts - which election officials duly ignored. "The secretary of state of New Mexico said they don't spend much time on undercounts," he said. "The secretary of state blames the voters. I blame the machines. Without a paper trail, there's no way to know which is correct."

So New Mexico's electronic voting machines didn't work well (at the very least), resulting in thousands of 'undervotes' for President. But Rebecca Vigil-Giron blames individual voters as opposed to the e-voting system vendors: even though those systems, meant to eliminate voting problems of this kind, apparently caused the majority of them.

"We've become a family," Vigil-Giron says of her close friends in the electronic voting machine business. It's not surprising that she thinks so, especially after one of the industry's leading figures helped fund her campaign.

And families stick together.

Verified Voting Newsletter

VICTORY IN VIRGINIA!

On February 24th, the Virginia State Legislature passed bill S.J. 371 by a unanimous vote. This bill adds two citizen members with computer security expertise to the Virginia Study Commission on voting systems. Previously there were no members with computer expertise.

Verified Voting supporters helped pass this bill by writing letters to the VA House Rules Committee and delegates. Congratulations, and thanks for all of your hard work.

If you're a Virginia resident interested in being nominated, please tell us about yourself on our contact page on the website at: http://verifiedvoting.org/contactus.php (Please use the contact form rather than e-mail.)

We'll be taking a look at the people who are interested in the new citizen committee member positions and we'll let you know who we endorse in the near future.

See our Virginia State page at:
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/stateview.php?area=48


ARKANSAS LEGISLATURE PASSES VVPB BILL,
AWAITS GOVERNOR'S SIGNATURE

House Bill 1360, introduced by Representatives Kidd and Sumpter, has passed House and Senate review and now heads for Governor Huckabee's desk for approval. The bill requires a voter-verified paper ballot (VVPB) but exempts five counties, to our disappointment. Still, this remains a great victory for voting rights in the state of Arkansas, and we thank each of you who worked to make it happen!


MARYLAND STATE BILLS

Several bills have been introduced in the Maryland Senate and House of Delegates related to touch-screen voting machines and voter-verified paper ballots (VVPBs). Only with a requirement for VVPB can the state's voting system be made more secure and ensure that meaningful recounts and audits are possible. Without it, voters have to use paperless touchscreen voting machines and are not able to confirm that their votes were accurately recorded as they intended.

VerifiedVoting.org joins with TrueVoteMD.org to call for the rapid passage of Senate Bill 9 and its companion, House Bill 107, which would require Maryland to adopt VVPB.

We strongly oppose Senate Bill 63 and House Bill 80. These bills would delegate decisions on voting machine security and reliability to the State Board of Elections. Since the State Board of Elections has repeatedly pronounced its opposition to VVPB, these bills would effectively forestall VVPB implementation.

Urge your lawmakers to vote in favor of SB9 and HB107, and tell them you oppose SB63/HB80.

Maryland residents take action at:
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5596
PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS ALERT ONLY IF YOU LIVE IN MARYLAND


NEW MEXICO STATE BILLS

If you live in New Mexico, let the House Voters & Elections Committee know that you support amending HB 1063 to require "voter-verifiable" paper ballots.

Right now the language in the bill simply says "verifiable"
paper records. But the key to reliable elections and voter confidence is the opportunity for the voter to confirm that his or her vote was recorded as intended.

If the bill doesn't say VOTER-verified, you cannot be certain you will have that chance. Without a voter-verified paper ballot, legitimate audits and meaningful recounts are impossible.

Contact key committee members right now and ask them to be sure the bill's language is corrected to assure the security and reliability of New Mexico's elections.

New Mexico residents take action at:
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5630
PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS ALERT ONLY IF YOU LIVE IN NEW MEXICO


NORTH CAROLINA STATE BILLS

A paperless e-voting machine in North Carolina irretrievably lost 4,400+ votes in November's election. This and other all too frequent e-voting machine malfunctions make it clear that NC voters deserve much better voting technology security and reliability... and leaders in the state legislature agree.

In February, Representatives Insko and Preston introduced HB 238, the Public Confidence in Elections bill which calls for voter-verified paper ballots statewide, as well as other provisions to improve the reliability and verifiability of North Carolina's elections. Senators Kinnaird and Allran introduced an identical companion bill in the Senate, SB 223.

But these bills need YOUR immediate support for passage.
There are those in the state who still think paperless e-voting is "good enough" and unless you stand up to be heard on this legislation, North Carolina's elections don't stand a chance.

North Carolina residents take action at:
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5618
PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS ALERT ONLY IF YOU LIVE IN NORTH CAROLINA



FEDERAL LEGISLATION SUMMARY

We thought it would be helpful to provide a summary of the various voting bills that have been introduced in Congress in the past few weeks. For more details and links to the bill texts, please see our legislation page:
http://verifiedvoting.org/legis

We hope you will visit our alerts page to take action, if you have not already done so. Visit often to see if there are new actions to take, at http://verifiedvoting.org/alerts


FEDERAL BILLS WE SUPPORT

H.R. 550, the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005" was introduced by Rep. Holt (NJ). In only two weeks, it has over 100 cosponsors. H.R. 550 is the "gold standard" of verified voting bills. It not only requires voter-verified paper ballots(VVPB) but also mandatory manual audits, requires increased security, prohibits undisclosed software, and more. It was carefully written after extensive consultation with many experts. VerifiedVoting.org supports H.R. 550 in the strongest possible terms and encourages all members of the House to become cosponsors.

Take action:
Visit our Action Center today at
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5620

The "Voting Integrity and Verification Act of 2005" (VIVA 2005), was introduced by Sen. Ensign (NV) as S. 330 in the Senate and by Rep. Gibbons (NV) as H.R. 704 in the House.

These bills are narrowly focused on voter-verified paper ballots. They don't do everything we want, but they do what they do very well. We support these bills and encourage all members of Congress to cosponsor them (as well as H.R. 550).

Take action: visit our Action Center today at
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5581



The organizations' website is at http://verifiedvoting.org

Legal Filing Highlights Blackwell's Hypocrisy in Recount Case

March 2, 2005
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact

Legal Filing Highlights Blackwell's Hypocrisy in Recount Case

Columbus, OH — A spokesman for the Green Party's 2004 presidential campaign, which initiated the Ohio recount, today blasted the suggestion by Ohio's Republican Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell that he would need to take depositions from John Kerry and John Edwards as part of the Ohio recount litigation.

"Mr. Blackwell's contention that he needs to depose Senators Kerry and Edwards is a laughable and blatantly political move. Mr. Blackwell has refused to be deposed himself about the Ohio election, has refused to appear before Congress and has refused to answer questions from members of the House Judiciary Committee who have been investigating allegations of election fraud. To suggest that Kerry and Edwards should be deposed to address a legal technicality while Mr. Blackwell continues to avoid any public scrutiny of his own misconduct in the Ohio election is the height of hypocrisy," said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the 2004 Cobb-LaMarche campaign.

The report by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff on the Ohio election and recount states that "there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio."

Blackwell's intention to depose Kerry and Edwards was made known by Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro in the latest round of legal filings concerning the Ohio recount. In February, Federal Judge Edmund Sargus in Columbus asked the parties in the Ohio recount case to submit filings to his court addressing whether the litigation should be transferred and consolidated with a Toledo case brought last November seeking to expedite the start of the recount. Blackwell's filing was in response to that request.

Attorneys for Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik, who jointly requested the Ohio recount, have already filed their response to the Judge's question. Kerry and Edwards, through their Ohio attorney, filed a one sentence statement with the Judge supporting the Cobb and Badnarik position. Kerry's lawyer also filed a short, two page summary charting inconsistencies observed by Democratic Party witnesses to the recount.

The matter is pending in the Eastern Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, before Judge Sargus.

Conferences, lectures and teach-ins about the Ohio election and electoral reform have been taking place all over the country, most recently in Santa Monica, California on Sunday.

Additional information about the recount and the entire 102 page report by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff can be found at www.votecobb.org . The website for the national Green Party is www.gp.org .

The Defense of the Electric Chair for Harris/Blackwell Column

Stephen Crockett, of Democratic Talk Radio, has issued a response to criticisms to his recent Democratic Voices column, "The Electric Chair for Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell." The column issued a public call for tightening criminal penalties for massive campaigns of denying Constitutionally guaranteed voting rights to large numbers of citizens and vote suppression/fraud. Crockett advocated the death penalty in extreme cases involving top public election officials. Crockett cited Harris and Blackwell as persons who if convicted would have deserved the death penalty under the new legal standards in his ideal world. The column is published at http://magic-city-news.com/article_3206.shtml.

...
The columnist and talk show hosts stated, "even if they could be convicted and sentenced, the possibility of actual executions is zero. Republican chief executives have established records of using their pardon powers to give Republican political figures involved in illegal activities and scandals get out of jail privileges We have seen it during Watergate and the Iran-Contra Affair. In Ohio, I believe Governor Taft would use his power to keep Blackwell out of jail much less away from the gallows. The situation in Florida, with the brother of the principal beneficiary of voting rights denials serving as Governor, is very similar. I believe Jeb Bush would pardon Harris. George W. Bush would pardon both in my opinion."

"In practical terms, Harris and Blackwell are completely safe from effective prosecution," according to Crockett. "As a conservative Democrat, I fully support the Constitution, even when it protects officeholders like Harris and Blackwell. The rule of law, legal processes and Constitutional principles remain my top priority. We need to focus on changing the law to stop future abuse although investigation into Harris in 2000 and Blackwell in 2004 would help highlight the practices to be banned."

Crockett strongly denies advocating "murder" or "executing political opponents" as he has been accused of by Internet activists on Right Wing websites. He says he has received many emails accusing him of "treason" and calling for his execution because he wrote the column.

Bush seeks propaganda sweepstakes

Social scientists, I sense, are already outlining articles on George W. Bush's legacy.

Their topic: Persuasion vs. Manipulation in the Bush Presidency.

Not since the collapse of the Soviet Union over 13 years ago has an administration produced so much material for a case study on governmental propaganda techniques. Case-building arguments and conclusions by President Bush and his surrogates regarding Social Security reform repeatedly redraw the line between fact and fiction, between information and indoctrination.

Propaganda in this case involves deliberately withholding relevant facts and spreading misinformation in order to reach preconceived ends that don't solve the declared problem and don't stand up to fact-based scrutiny.

Government propaganda campaigns typically include creating overblown fears and inflated desires or expectations; exaggerating the urgency of an issue in order to deflect attention from more pressing or unpopular issues; and attacking the motives and integrity of messengers of differing views rather than refuting the evidence they bring and the conclusions they draw.