all i can say is thank you for a sane commentary.

Thanks Tim :)

I'll give you that it's sane relative to other things he's written.

Dave

Dave,

Wow and here I was waiting for you to denigrate me. Your probably setting me up. Thanks anyways for your first ever compliment of my writing sir.

Paul,

I've been recently contacted by NeHama Pablum and Kobi (formerly Casper) Milktoast, who live in the village of Ramát Tifshút (Height of Stupidity), not too far from Government Hill in Jerusalem.

They are highly offended by the title of this article. They thoroughly agree with the meat of its assertions but resent being made to look as though they themselves are characteristic of the village they live in.

If you fail to change the name of the article forthwith, and issue an apology, they intend to sue you in Jerusalem District court for NIS 2,000,000 ($540,000 and going up).

A Bill of Particulars will follow shortly.

Sincerely,
Ruvy in Jerusalem,
Counsel
Dewey Screwem & Howe, PLC
International Damage Specialists

Pablo,

did you mean milquetoast?

I am not convinced in the least by your arguments. That is not to say that you are completely wrong. (Also, I want to know where are the videos?) That Diebold and their ilk are rigging elections I think is more than likely. I think they rigged the New Hampshire Democratic Primary so Clinton would win it. That 99.9% of politicians in the country, state, local and federal officials, both appointed and elected, are at least some way in the back pocket of the big corporations is more than likely true. But consider this for a moment: John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich both scare the hell out of the big business interests. What if one of them should end up with the nomination, or better yet combine for the Democratic ticket? And for the other side, Huckabee really annoys the big business interests and it appears that he also has a shot at the nomination. What if that is who the general election comes down to? It may not be business as you know it for much longer.

You didn't mention those three. Why not? Also there is the increasing power of the Internet. Granted that a lot of the information is "provided" by the giant corporations but they can't control all of it. People are increasingly getting their news and commentary from the Internet to help them make their decisions. This could prove to be the downfall of those corporate interests as grassroots movements more and more put this powerful tool to work for them. Even if not in this election, eventually, soon, we will break off the shackles of corporate slavery and open our collective eyes. Power is not forever, especially when there is an increasing access to information.

But then maybe you are right and it is all a sham. Unless, of course, you, with your article, have managed to wake up at least a few people.

Maurice,

No I meant Milk toast:

milk toast
-noun
toast, usually buttered, served in hot milk with sugar or with salt and pepper.
Its an Americanism

"Its an Americanism"

Sadly, it is indeed.

And like most "americanisms" of words and phrases of foreign origin, it's a bastardization of the original, reflecting americans' abysmal ignorance of any language but their own, which itself is a bastardization of English.

Clavos,

I couldn't agree more

David Kelley,

Thank you for your excellent comment. What I did not point out in my article that furthers my argument about Voter Fraud, with the exception of a minor complaint by Mr. Kucinich, is that it is rare to see candidates either for President or Congress claim said fraud. Others have the same information as we do, including candidates. The paperless unverifiable machines speak for themselves. So why aren't more politicians running for office up in arms about having fair elections? I postulate that they know the score too, hence little to no outrage. If you were running for office, wouldn't you demand accountability for the vote? I certainly would. It is outrageous. I suspect that for the most part the electoral process has become so corrupt, and that most politicians are so in bed with their corporate masters that they hardly make a wimper. Or, those that are in office are being blackmailed to tow the line. The biggest problem with intelligence/police agencies in my opinion is that they have the access to tap anyone, and because most of us are human, we all have things that we are either ashamed of, i.e marital infidelity, or some other shameful deed, or even involved in something that could be construed as being illegal. I do not, nor do I want to have the ability to know what you are in your private life up to David. However there certainly are intelligence agencies that do. The fox is in the henhouse, and who is watching the fox? Jay Rockefeller perhaps? Smirk.

As to why I did not include more of the candidates and their handlers, I felt that the reader would be less familiar with some of the other names of said handlers. As to Dennis or Edwards competing in a fair way, I have already alluded to why I do not think that is possible. As for Huckelberry, in my opinion; the way that he went from about 3% in the "polls" that we now know to be a bunch of bs, to 15-20% in about a week, which even to this day Huck does not know how this happened, is due to the fact that those that are in control used him as a buffer against Dr. No.

Just my two sense worth.

David Kelley,

The videos load for me? They don't for you?

Dear God, why can't the U.S. carry out an election in three months like the rest of the civilized world.

I'm just going to keep repeating to myself - only another 10 months of this yammering, only another 10 months of this yammering...

But wait...then it all STARTS ALL OVER AGAIN.

Yeesh.

I mean, really....Yeesh!

David K, and others, what you have to keep in mind here is that what Pablo is presenting is all supposition - that being a fascinating scenario of what COULD be not what actually IS. The videos are not proof of election fraud, they're just evidence that fraud is possible. And what is possible is important, but it is not proof of a crime. It's a warning for us to fix things, not a license to launch a witchhunt.

At heart, conspiracy theorists are living in a reality which exists mainly in their own minds. They spin fantasy based around a nugget of reality and then forget that only that little nugget is actually real. They want conspiracies to exist because it's comforting to think that all of their personal failures are someone else's fault and that control of their lives has been taken from them by outside forces rather than pissed away because of their own foolishness.

Dave

"...due to the fact that those that are in control used him as a buffer against Dr. No."

Were that true, 'twould be a strong argument in favor of secret societies in control.

However, the more likely explanation, especially after his most recent debate showing, is that Ron Paul simply doesn't sing the tune the majority of the electorate wants to hear.

But I'm sure Ron Paul would prefer the secret control theory...

Don't doubt for a moment that when the election is all done and fingers are being pointed, Paul's supporters will blame his not entirely impressive finish on a vast conspiracy of some sort.

Dave

"A bastadisation of English"

Bastards!

If any of youse need proper lessons in English, youse can ask me and I'll give youse the drum from Down Under.

BTW, it's all a plot by KAOS.

you guys are funny

It must be nice Dave to live in the dream world you do, an old saying comes to mind, ignorance is bliss.

Let me ask you Dave, would you deposit your dough in an atm that didnt work? Sure you would........

On a serious note now ...

Pablo is right in a way.

The political process HAS been hijacked in the US.

The political parties no longer really represent ordinary people, who in my view now have no real voice in the US.

They are run by vested interests - those groups and organisations that can make the biggest political donations.

There is the problem.

And it's not some bizarre plot.

It's just how America runs. In the power stakes, money speaks volumes.

I thought it was S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

Damn you, Blofeld!

Dave,

I suppose you didnt watch the video of the guy testifying before congress.........if you had you would have noticed several things. The first that he said I think three time, that if the exit polls diverged much, that in his professional opinion the election was fixed. You would also have seen the memory cards.....and you probably didnt know that the head of the voter machine company in NH had no problem with walking around during an election with spare memory cards in his pocket.

In the words of HL Mencken nobody ever went broke UNERESTIMATING the intelligence of the American people. How apt. I still have that forest with a beautiful stream in the Sahara desert for ya Dave, send me an email, and we can discuss terms.

btw, if the election system was any more fixed, you could drive a mack truck through it. I will also give you great terms on the property in the Sahara.........its so gorgeous.........even trout in the stream. Your just the SUCKER I have been lookin for dude. :) :)

Can you imagine how paranoid someone must be to actually believe that the election system in the land of the free home of the brave could be fixed???

That people would actually conspire to FIX elections? Wow..........call the nuthouse.

Who is the nut here??? hmmmmm??

Talk about GULLIBLE.........I chuckle to myself.......no accountability..........no trail.........made my dickheads........corporate diebold dickheads........no wonder they pulled it off. Piece o cake.

Kinda reminds me of Bill O'lielly recently calling cnbc (general electric) liberal, I guess thats why they sued to have Kucinich barred. You will believe ANYTHING. Yet I am the paranoid one, I am the guy with no sense. Sure Dave you keep thinkin that.

If you were to be anymore naive, and frankly dumb,
it would be amazing.

The only conspiracy here is that a whole lotta dumb americans have been taken for a ride, and for the most part, very few of em even notice. They are too busy watching the playoffs and drinkin Coors lite.

Where did YOU learn to trust government Dave. Was that in your libertarian manual? Still believe in the tooth fairy too do ya?

STM,

I couldnt agree more. Dave the libertarian has other ideas. He is still waiting for the easter bunny. The world is MADE of conspiracies, and the fact that Dave doesnt understand that speaks volumes about his ability to comprehend the world. As I have said before I am NOT paranoid, if I were, I would hardly be talking on here. I am a realist plain and simple, those that believe that this, or the last, or the election before that were fair in any sense of the imagination are just plain DUMB.

Pablito's had a couple too many scotches this evening...

No, Scotch is the drink of the British.

A couple of Virginia White Lightnings perhaps??

Here is a new one for ya Dave:

On the next rigged election S Carolina. Here is a quote from their constitution Article 2 Section 1:

SECTION 1. Elections to be by secret ballot; protection of right of suffrage.

All elections by the people shall be by secret ballot, but the ballots shall not be counted in secret.

Can't wait to hear you twist this one. As in SECRET. As in source code, as in no one can see.
As in UNVERIFIABLE.

Sure Dave, I am the naive one here.

DD: "I thought it was S.P.E.C.T.R.E."

Them too. And SMERSH.

Don't you have secret ballot in the US??

I dont drink much, im out of smoke

STM

Yes secret ballots, not counted in SECRET. As in unverifiable, as in untraceable......as in WE have been had :)

No independent election scrutineers to watch the whole process, including counting?

Stan, we have verifiers at the polls and overseeing the counting of ballots. They don't go into the polling booth with you and watch how you vote, but that's about it.

As to what Pablo's getting at about the SC election process, it's a bit unclear to me. Maybe he's trying to point out that SC uses particularly crappy voting machines that a lot of other states are junking?

Or maybe he's raising an interesting question - it could happen. To wit, how does one fulfill the oversight requirement he noted when votes are being tabulated in virtual space rather than physical space. It's a valid question which I don't have an answer to and which I think could be grounds for a legal challenge to the outcome in SC.

Of course it's still not proof of fraud, just another reason to be concerned with the shortcomings of computerized voting machines.

Dave

Let me ask you Dave, would you deposit your dough in an atm that didnt work? Sure you would........

I wouldn't deposit my money in an ATM whether it worked or not.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm in favor of these computerized voting machines. Where on earth did you get that idea?

Understanding that there are no documented instances of fraud with them and thinking they are acceptable are not the same thing.

Dave

Dave, post 36

How could I possibly prove voter fraud? Unless I were an inside conspirator to said crime. Of course I cannot. What I am doing is pointing out (such as the case in S Carolina, blatant violations of constitutional law. It it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, more than likely it is a duck. That is all I have been saying, yes I ASSUME that they are fixing elections for all of the reasons that I have put forth.

Pablito that last one is dumb even for u. How do u prove any crime? U get witnesses and question those inoilved and find evidence. With the number of leftist nuts out looking for evidence of voter fraud it would be found if it were happening. And in fact some has been found. Mostly democrats registering dead people.

Lumpy,

That's kinda funny coming from you. Last time I checked the republicans are attempting (and they will probably succeed with the new rubber stamp Supreme Court) to make it even harder for minorities and others to vote). Even though they have no "evidence" of said fraud. As to the evidence of probably crime, it is invisible, why don't you take the time to watch the video, where a computer programmer hired by voting machine companies says that it is all but impossible to detect fraud. Your tin foil hat is showing again Lumpy.

Great example of the dogmatic blindness u display constantly. The fact that the intrusion into the database is almost undetectable as the guy says on the video does not mean that the fraud is undetectable. After the fact u can't tell if ballots were shredded either. But in either cas u can see the fraudster behaving suspiciously or he can be ratted out by confederates. You think a poll worker wonlt report a guy qho hangs out at the polling place for 20 minutes not voting and using his PDA the whole time?

Plus simple industry standard security hardware could easily prevent a lot of the potential hacking.

Lumpy,

the progammer also said it would be almost impossible to detect voter fraud too. As to dogmatic blindness. Ummm what particular form of dogma am I aligned with? Yours is so obvious you can't see the forest for the trees sir. While on the subject of pda's, why dont you check out central tabulators?

I prefer my Babbage Engine, Pablito. As for your programmer I have no idea what his qualifiations as a programmer are but he clearly has no experience as an election monitor. I do. We are required to periodically patrol the area around the polling place. We're looking for illegal electioneering but we'd certainly spot your partisan hacker especially now that this issue is known. But like I said simple security can prevent this in the future.

The Pentagon and security agencies routinely keep highly classified information on their computer systems.

If those systems were all that vulnerable to hackers and security breeches, common sense tells you they wouldn't keep classified information on them.

The same goes for banks, brokerage houses and just about every business with trade secrets.

If the voting machines are vulnerable, fix 'em.

It's not rocket surgery...

How could I possibly prove voter fraud? Unless I were an inside conspirator to said crime.

Sometimes you say things which really are mindboggling. Do we not regularly get convictions of people on crimes without their cooperation? There's something called evidence.

For that matter, in our system there's also something called 'presumption of innocence'. You might want to look into it sometime. It means that in the absence of proof that election fraud was committed, we don't assume that it has been or make unmerited accusations of who committed it.

yes I ASSUME that they are fixing elections for all of the reasons that I have put forth.

None of which can even vaguely be defined as actual evidence.

Dave

Headline News on yahoo today:

Experts urge U.S. to prevent election rigging in Pakistan.


I choked on my cereal.