Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News TUESDAY 12/27/05

HOLIDAY SPECIAL!!! Neoconservative activist,
Jeanne_Kirkpatrick defines democracy
(see first post, US State Dept).

THESE ARE THE TIMES THAT FRY MEN’S MINDS

Never forget the pursuit of Truth.
Only the deluded & complicit accept election results on blind faith.

Election Fraud News TUESDAY 12/27/05

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.

If you can:

1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.

2. Post stories using the "Election Fraud and Reform News Sources" listed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x371233

3. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.

If you want to know how post "News Banners" or other images, go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=371233#371391



All previous daily threads are available here:
http://www.independentmediasource.com/DU_archives/du_2004erd_el_ref_fr_thr_calenders.htm

Please

"Recommend"

for the Greatest Page (it's the link just below).

NATION: US Dept. of State Defines Democracy – A Holiday Bonus
The honor is all mine, the commentary writes itself. This is amazing and frightening at the same time.

ELECTIONS

The Benchmark of Elections

Elections are the central institution of democratic representative governments. Why? Because, in a democracy, the authority of the government derives solely from the consent of the governed. The principal mechanism for translating that consent into governmental authority is the holding of free and fair elections.

All modern democracies hold elections, but not all elections are democratic. Right-wing dictatorships, Marxist regimes, and single-party governments also stage elections to give their rule the aura of legitimacy. In such elections, there may be only one candidate or a list of candidates, with no alternative choices. Such elections may offer several candidates for each office, but ensure through intimidation or rigging that only the government-approved candidate is chosen. Other elections may offer genuine choices--but only within the incumbent party. These are not democratic elections.

What Are Democratic Elections?

Jeane Kirkpatrick, scholar and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has offered this definition: "Democratic elections are not merely symbolic....They are competitive, periodic, inclusive, definitive elections in which the chief decision-makers in a government are selected by citizens who enjoy broad freedom to criticize government, to publish their criticism and to present alternatives." (The Sandinistas elected a government that Kirkpatrick opposed. She supported the Reagan policy of harassing the elected government of Nicaraugua. Great person to define “democratic elections.”

What do Kirkpatrick's criteria mean? Democratic elections are competitive. Opposition parties and candidates must enjoy the freedom of speech, assembly, and movement necessary to voice their criticisms of the government openly and to bring alternative policies and candidates to the voters. Simply permitting the opposition access to the ballot is not enough. Elections in which the opposition is barred from the airwaves, has its rallies harassed or its newspapers censored, are not democratic. ( (No kidding? You mean a news shut-down on election fraud, eco-catastrophes, domestic suppression, etc. Sounds like “barred form the airwaves.”) The party in power may enjoy the advantages of incumbency, but the rules and conduct of the election contest must be fair. (What are these people smoking? How can they say this in view of Florida 2000, Georgia 2002, Ohoi, etc. 2004, Ohio 2005, twice...)

Democratic elections are inclusive. The definition of citizen and voter must be large enough to include a large proportion of the adult population. A government chosen by a small, exclusive group is not a democracy--no matter how democratic its internal workings may appear. One of the great dramas of democracy throughout history has been the struggle of excluded groups--whether racial, ethnic, or religious minorities, or women--to win full citizenship, and with it the right to vote and hold office. In the United States, for example, only white male property holders enjoyed the right to elect and be elected when the Constitution was signed in 1787. The property qualification disappeared by the early 19th century, and women won the right to vote in 1920. Black Americans, however, did not enjoy full voting rights in the southern United States until the civil rights movement of the 1960s.(Were black Americans allowed full voting rights in Florida 2000, Ohio 2004?; were Hisipanic and Native Americans allowed those rights in New Mexico 2004? Did this escape the notice of the State Department?) And finally, in 1971, younger citizens were given the right to vote when the United States lowered the voting age from 21 to 18.

Democratic elections are definitive. They determine the leadership of the government. Subject to the laws and constitution of the country, popularly elected representatives hold the reins of power. They are not simply figureheads or symbolic leaders.

Finally, democratic elections are not limited to selecting candidates. Voters can also be asked to decide policy issues directly through referendums and initiatives that are placed on the ballot. In the United States, for example, state legislatures can decide to "refer," or place, an issue directly before the voters. In the case of an initiative, citizens themselves can gather a prescribed number of signatures (usually a percentage of the number of registered voters in that state) and require that an issue be placed on the next ballot--even over the objections of the state legislature or governor. In a state such as California, voters confront dozens of legislative initiatives each time they vote--on issues ranging from environmental pollution to automobile insurance costs.

Democratic Ethics and the Loyal Opposition

Democracies thrive on openness and accountability, with one very important exception: the act of voting itself. To cast a free ballot and minimize the opportunity for intimidation, voters in a democracy must be permitted to cast their ballots in secret. At the same time, the protection of the ballot box and tallying of vote totals must be conducted as openly as possible, so that citizens are confident that the results are accurate and that the government does, indeed, rest upon their "consent." (Would throwing people out of tabulation areas count? Would declaring national security emergencies in tabulation areas to get rid of the press count? Would secretive counting apply here? )

One of the most difficult concepts for some to accept, especially in nations where the transition of power has historically taken place at the point of a gun, is that of the "loyal opposition." This idea is a vital one, however. It means, in essence, that all sides in a democracy share a common commitment to its basic values. Political competitors don't necessarily have to like each other, but they must tolerate one another and acknowledge that each has a legitimate and important role to play. Moreover, the ground rules of the society must encourage tolerance and civility in public debate.

When the election is over, the losers accept the judgment of the voters. If the incumbent party loses, it turns over power peacefully. No matter who wins, both sides agree to cooperate in solving the common problems of the society. The losers, now in the political opposition, know that they will not lose their lives or go to jail. On the contrary, the opposition, whether it consists of one party or many, can continue to participate in public life with the knowledge that its role is essential in any democracy worthy of the name. They are loyal not to the specific policies of the government, but to the fundamental legitimacy of the state and to the democratic process itself.(…”fundamental legitimacy of the state”…now what would they know about that!)

As the next election comes around, opposition parties will again have the opportunity to compete for power. In addition, a pluralistic society, one in which the reach of government is limited, tends to offer election losers alternatives for public service outside government. Those defeated at the polls may choose to continue as a formal opposition party, (We’ll get one of those here soon, we hope.)but they may also decide to participate in the wider political process and debate through writing, teaching, or joining one of many private organizations concerned with public policy issues. Democratic elections, after all, are not a fight for survival but a competition to serve.

BushCo learned how to inspire this in Ohio. Remember the 200 citizens taking over the state house after 2004. Well now it's refined...on a massive scale. Shame on Bush!


http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5504984,00.html

Dozens killed across Iraq in shootings, bombings

Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Violence increased across Iraq after a lull following the Dec. 15 parliamentary elections, with at least two dozen people including a U.S. soldier killed Monday in shootings and bombings mostly targeting the Shiite-dominated security services.

The Defense Ministry director of operations, Brig. Gen. Abdul Aziz Mohammed-Jassim, blamed increased violence in the past two days on insurgents trying to deepen the political turmoil following the elections.

The violence came as three Iraqi opposition groups threatened another wave of protests and civil disobedience if allegations of fraud are not properly investigated.

But I digress. If you want to win in NC, you better talk to ESS because they’re the only voting machine company in NC now that Diebold chickened out. And after the Democratic Governor appointed a ex Diebold worker to head state elections. The best made plans of mice and men…

http://www.newbernsj.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=25393&Section=Local

Diebold decision leaves one company to provide compliant voting machines

December 24,2005
BY Sue Book View stories by reporter
Sun Journal Staff

Craven County Board of Elections' choice for new voting equipment is now the only game in town for North Carolina's 100 counties.

Election Systems and Software, regionally based in New Bern, is the only voting equipment manufacturer left that is certified to sell its machines in the state. Diebold Election Systems' decided earlier this week not to sell in the state.

"Now we're charged with the task of providing election systems in North Carolina," said Owen Andrews of Printelect, ES&S's New Bern-based representative for North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/27/nyregion/27diebold.html

http://news.com.com/John+Diebold,+79,+a+visionary+of+the+computer+age,+dies/2100-1003_3-6009646.html

By JENNIFER BAYOT
Published: December 27, 2005

John Diebold, a visionary thinker whose early and persistent promotion of computers and other far-reaching innovations helped shape industrial development in America and beyond, died yesterday at his home in Bedford Hills, N.Y. He was 79.

The cause was esophageal cancer, said his nephew, also named John Diebold.

Mr. Diebold, who held degrees in business and engineering, was an evangelist of the future. In 1952, at a time when computers weighed five tons, his book "Automation" described how programmable devices could change the day-to-day operations of all kinds of businesses. Even the book's title was novel: it introduced the modern-day meaning of a term that had previously applied only to the mechanical handling of automobile parts at the Ford Motor Company.

Mr. Diebold (pronounced DEE-bold) made a career of recognizing relevant advances in technology and explaining them to the likes of A.T. & T., Boeing, Xerox and I.B.M. Through books, speeches and his international consulting firm, Mr. Diebold persuaded major corporations to automate their assembly lines, store their records electronically and install interoffice computer networks...


Latest Breaking News-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2007950&mesg_id=2007950

Election Reform-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x406727