phlux bboard - Voter Fraud - A Pattern of Deceit

Home : Message Boards : Topics Unrelated to PHLUX : Voter Fraud - A Pattern of Deceit

Voter Fraud - A Pattern of Deceit
I have been following the dirty tricks all over the country to disenfranchise voters. I've heard of so many, in fact, that I started doing a little research of my own and I've found some patterns. Check out how many of these are in swing states, the voters they affect and the party affiliation of the people who have resigned in the cases where blame was actually assigned.

Florida – Broward County - 58,000 voters in largely Democratic Broward County Florida never received their absentee ballots. The US Postal Service says they were delivered to the elections office but does not know what happened to them after that.

Florida – Manatee County and other counties all over Florida – People claiming to be "election officials" are turning up on the doorsteps of voters who requested absentee ballots, offering to collect and turn in their ballots. One Pasco woman said she was led to believe they were from the elections office and that she told the strangers she hadn't completed the ballot, but they took it anyway. The woman had voted for Kerry but election officials were unable to find a record of her vote ever being turned in. "We've had a bunch of them - 100 at least," said Bob Sweat, elections supervisor for Manatee County. "It's probably going on all over the state of Florida."

Florida - Florida's secretary of state ruled that voter registrations would be deemed incomplete if those registering failed to check a box affirming their citizenship, even if they had signed an oath saying the same thing elsewhere on the form. Whose applications get rejected? A Washington Post examination of rejected applications in Duval County found three times as many were from Democrats, compared with Republicans. It also found a strong tilt toward rejection of blacks' registrations.

Florida - The case of Florida's felon list - used by state officials in 2000 to wrongly disenfranchise thousands of blacks - has been widely reported. Less widely reported has been overwhelming evidence that the errors were deliberate and continue. In an article coming next week in Harper's, Greg Palast, reveals that few of those wrongly purged are back on the voter lists. State officials have imposed Kafkaesque hurdles for voters trying to get back on the rolls. Depending on the county, those attempting to get their votes back have been required to seek clemency for crimes committed by others, or to go through quasi-judicial proceedings to prove that they are not felons with similar names.

Florida - Officials appear to be doing their best to make voting difficult for blacks who do manage to register to vote. Florida law requires local election officials provide polling places where voters can cast early ballots. Duval County is providing only one such location, while other counties with similar voting populations are providing multiple sites. And in Duval and other counties the early voting sites are miles away from precincts with black majorities.

Nevada and Oregon - Earlier this week former employees of Sproul & Associates (operating under the name Voters Outreach of America), a firm hired by the Republican National Committee to register voters, told a Nevada TV station that their supervisors systematically tore up Democratic registrations. The accusations are backed by physical evidence in the form of thousands of discarded Democratic registration forms. Officials have begun a criminal investigation into reports of similar actions by Sproul in Oregon.

Ohio - Ohio's secretary of state, J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, tried to use an archaic rule about paper quality to invalidate thousands of new, heavily Democratic registrations. He said the paper was not thick enough. In this case, the courts stepped in and stopped him.

Ohio - A caller interrupting a Columbus couple's dinner earlier this week said he was from the Franklin County Board of Elections and told the elderly woman that her voting site had changed and that on Nov. 2 she and her husband should cast their ballots at a South Side precinct. This precinct is far from the elderly couple's (who are life long Democrats) home. When the woman called the Board of Elections to question the move, she was told no move had been made but that the Board of Elections had receive dozens of similar phone calls. The elections director, Matt Damschroder, said there are two scams going on that cause him concern: The caller tells voters their precincts have changed or the caller offers to pick up an absentee-ballot application, deliver the ballot to the voter and return the completed ballot to the elections office.

Wisconsin - A Republican county executive insists that this year, when everyone expects a record turnout, Milwaukee will receive fewer ballots than it got in 2000 or 2002 - a recipe for chaos at polling places serving urban, mainly Democratic voters.

South Dakota – Six Republican staffers and campaign workers have resigned for filling out absentee ballots in the names of student registering to vote Republican and discarding the absentee ballots of voters registering to vote Democratic. Chief among the staffers was Larry Russell, head of the South Dakota GOP's get-out-the-vote operation, the Republican Victory Program. In a statement, party executive director Jason Glodt says, "The South Dakota Republican Party has a zero tolerance policy regarding such matters, and on Friday and Saturday of last week accepted the resignations of the four independent contractors who were involved in the handling of absentee ballot requests." They also accepted the resignation of Russell. Today comes news, however, that Russell -- still under investigation in South Dakota -- has been reassigned to run President Bush's get-out-the-vote operation in Ohio. And Russell's bringing along with him to Ohio three of the five other GOP staffers who had to resign in South Dakota and who are also under investigation in that state.

New Hampshire – In February, the Executive Director of the New Hampshire Republican party, Chuck McGee, resigned when it was revealed that the state party had hired a telemarketing firm to jam the phone lines of the Democratic get-out-the-vote operation. At that time, McGee fingered Jim Tobin, the New England regional director of the Bush-Cheney campaign, as one of his accomplices. Tobin, however, did not resign from the Bush-Cheney position until last Friday, months after the voter fraud charges were filed.

Pennsylvania – Bush/Cheney campaign staff submitted last-minute requests on Friday in Philadelphia to relocate 63 polling places. Of the 63 requests for changes, 53 are in political divisions where the population of white voters is less than 10 percent.

President Jimmy Carter citing the experience of his Carter Center in monitoring international elections, said "some basic international requirements for a fair election are missing in Florida." Most significant, he said, were requirements that a nonpartisan electoral commission or official organize and conduct the electoral process and that voting procedures be uniform for all citizens. He said Florida's top election official in 2000, Secretary of State Katherine Harris, was "highly partisan" and that Harris' successor, Glenda Hood, has shown "the same strong bias." He said Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's brother, had done little to "correct these departures from principles of fair and equal treatment."

These abuses are not aberrations. They're the inevitable result of a Republican Party culture in which dirty tricks that distort the vote are rewarded, not punished. It's a culture that will persist until voters - whose will still does count, if expressed strongly enough - hold that party accountable.

posted by c -- on Nov 05, 2004 03:32AM

Ohio - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said. Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush actually received only 365 votes in the precinct, according to Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections.

South Dakota - Other voting aberrations I've since learned about also include massive voter intimidation in South Dakota where, on November 2nd, white men walked behind the back bumper of every vehicle belonging to a Native American Indian who'd come to vote and recorded their license plate number.

North Carolina - And then is the case of the 4,500 votes “accidentally lost” by voting machines in largely Democratic Carteret County right here in North Carolina. Apparently the machines only held 3,000 votes instead of the 10,000 each the election officials “thought” they held.

Ohio - Finally, there was the last minute, state-santioned intimidation of voters in Ohio, where Republican pollsters were allowed to harrass voters in the polling places about their right to vote.

I am saying it out loud now -- I don't think George Bush won this election. AGAIN!

posted by c -- on Nov 05, 2004 02:15PM

What a one-sided analyis....

Attempts at voter fraud and deceit exist on both sides; you can't just go through and pick out only the reports that show fraud on the republican side.

posted by -- on Dec 28, 2004 07:36AM

I always liked the bumper sticker I saw on numerous vehicles in my area... "Lets not elect him in 2004 either."
posted by StU aRt on Dec 28, 2004 11:09AM

Ahh yes...those stickers...

Yet another example of how the libs swear by the constitution until it doesn't work in their favor...

posted by -- on Dec 28, 2004 12:31PM

I'm not sure exactly how a bumper sticker that alleges the first election did not result in the legal election of GW Bush as president has anything to do with "libs swearing by the constitution until it doesn't work in their favor..." Frankly, that doesn't make any sense.

And, more to the point, if you can find any evidence of democratic voter fraud, I'd like to see it. If it is as rampant as the republican's illegal efforts to manipulate the vote, it should be easy to find and document -- as this was. I challenge anyone who would dismiss these reports to do the research and see what they can find because, trust me, I looked. I didn't find it. On the other hand, most of the things I documented here originally are in the process of being investigated and, in several cases including Ohio, Nevada, Oregon and Pennsylvania, criminal charges have been filed.

Perhaps you're suggesting that democrats cheat too but they're just so much smarter that they don't get caught -- but that's poor logic. If those democrats were so smart that they could perpetrate massive nationwide voter fraud and leave absolutely no paper trail, surely they could have stolen the election too.

Instead of just putting your hands on your hips and sticking out your lip and saying "Nu-unh", your country would be better served by a little analytical thinking here. I refer you to the words of one of our country's greatest sages, Mark Twain: "I support my country all the time and I support my government when they're right." The acts of this administration in their fight for reelection are wrong and they undermine our democracy. As Americans, it is our responsibility to call them on this. Every voter has the right to vote and have their vote count, period.

posted by c -- on Dec 28, 2004 11:50PM

Liberals claim that GWB did not legally win the 2000 election. This is what is meant by that bumper sticker. The democrats always acuse the republicans of overstepping bounds, and violating the constitution (the patriot act is a good example). However, when they don't like the result of something (2000 election) the constitution is out the window apparently. Clearly the electoral college elects the president and clearly GWB won the electoral college vote, despite the fact that he did indeed lose the popular vote. What I said makes perfect sense; you obviously didn't understand what I was saying or I didn't explain it clearly enough. It seems funny to me how (and perhaps this happens some on both sides) that people claim things are unconstitutional and unfair when these things work to their disadvantage, but as soon as they don't like something, the system must be wrong and flawed and a perfectly legal election suddenly becomes illegal despite the fact that it is compatible with the constitution.

posted by -- on Dec 29, 2004 09:16AM

um......well...Its still a wicked funny bumper sticker and it always makes me chuckle!
posted by StU aRt on Dec 29, 2004 09:34AM

I can't argue with that Greg. How have you been?
posted by -- on Dec 29, 2004 09:47AM

Good man Hope yer holidays are goin good!
posted by StU aRt on Dec 29, 2004 04:19PM

I find it interesting how much acrimony a couple of careless lines seeded with some callously chosen labels can beget. Beware of the trolls; they find plesure in rifts.
posted by Clint Phipps on Dec 29, 2004 07:40PM

Are you calling me a troll because you disagree with me?
posted by -- on Dec 29, 2004 10:47PM

What makes you think I AM calling you a troll? ...or perhas you trying to say you find pleasure in rifts?
posted by Clint Phipps on Dec 30, 2004 02:07AM

Not trying to contribute to rifts here, in fact, I think our country has really suffered because of such division, but I don't see that anyone in this thread has suggested that republicans have "overstepped bounds and violated the constitution" EXCEPT for the instances I have sited in the 2004 election, where there seems to have been a concerted effort to deny many Americans their constitutionally guaranteed right to vote and have that vote count. I'm not here to rehash the 2000 election. I am working to ensure the irregularities of the 2004 election do not become the voter fraud of the 2008 election. Our last two elections have set frightening precedents for our country. If we sit back and accept the manipulation of our electoral process, we will get more of the same -- and we will deserve it. It is our patriotic duty to stand up against such unethical behavior. To be succint, it is the right thing to do.
posted by c -- on Dec 30, 2004 02:47AM

I don't find any pleasure in rifts; I was just trying to contribute to the board. I guess I am unsure of the purpose of your troll comment.

I didn't say that anyone in this thread accused republicans of anything specific; I simply wished to opine about the bumper sticker and its inaccuracy.

Carolyn, your last post makes a good point and I can't argue there--in fact, I agree that we must keep a close eye on elections and that if any corruption is proven to exist, we must put a stop to it--no matter which side it is. However, it is important to point out that both sides can be corrupt when it comes to the election process. Look at the several GOP offices that were broken into and robbed.

posted by -- on Dec 30, 2004 07:27AM

Tell me more about Republican headquarters being broken into and robbed. I have not heard that. I do know there was a national story that happened right here in my hometown of Raliegh, North Carolina, where the Republican Party headquarters was vandalized but it wasn't robbed and it wasn't done by Democrats. The vandalism was carried out by a group of anarchists who coordinate via the internet and travel the country causing destruction to what they see as "power symbols". They have hit Republican and Democratic offices alike. They were also involved in the World Bank protests. Three of the vandals were caught. None of them were even from North Carolina and they were all 20-year-olds.

The national media made a big deal about this attack but I saw the result with my own two eyes and it wasn't all that. For example, the press said that the assailants tried to burn the building down. Turns out they based that misconception (or "lie" if you believe that such stories are really propaganda planted in the media to inflame division) on the fact that they found some spent matches on the wrap around porch. In any case, I saw the much lauded defiled building and the damage was nothing more than broken windows and graffiti.

THAT SAID, what those folks did was wrong. It was dangerous on a number of different levels. Even so, I think our country should be asking itself why people are so angry? Why would they act out in this way? Until we address the source of this discontent, this kind of thing is going to continue to fester and occasionally erupt.

And, to my mind, THAT is the real problem. No one is even listening to anyone anymore.

After 9-11, our country enjoyed an unprecedented level of community. People began to help their neighbors. Drivers would let you out in traffic. For a brief, beautiful time, we looked out for each other. But that day is long past and I have often asked myself why. What changed? What I've come up with is this. We were played.

The Bush media team had a war they wanted to sell. A lot of people in this country didn't buy that that war was necessary. And, since the administration couldn't sway those folks, it set about turning the rest of the populatoin against them. Utilizing their massive propaganda machine (Fox and Sinclair Communications are just a taste of how massive), the Bush Administration began to plant the seed that anyone who expressed dissent was unpatriotic. And when the invasion began, mottos like "Support the Troops", a sentiment everyone in America can get behind, soon came to mean "Support the War". Spin monsters like Bill O'Reilly began to paint anyone who raised questions as either an idiot or a terrorist. I tell you, I think George Bush brought terrorism home to our country much more effectively than bin Ladin ever could have. He turned us against each other.

But back to my point about listening... We are not listening anymore. Everyone is so married to their opinions that very few people are willing to even try to find that middle ground. (This board excepted and I can't tell you how grateful I am for that. On all the web, I haven't found another board where people treat others with dissenting opinions as respectfully as this one.)

Win/Win solutins are only accomplished when we know what the other wants.

What do the people who committed the terrible acts of 9-11 want? What have they asked for? I mean, they've made demands but we don't hear about them in our media. But, bin Ladin and others have been singing the same song for decades -- they want the US to stay out of their affairs and leave them alone. They want us to stop setting up deals with monarchys we've propped up to take middle eastern oil. They want us to stop acting like their countries are just subsidiaries of America, there to provide us oil. They want us to stop overthrowing their governments, selling arms to one side and then the other and fomenting trouble.

In short, they want us to stay out of their affairs.

From the moment we helped oust the Palenstinians from their land to create a Jewish homeland after World War II, the US has been sticking our nose where it shouldn't be. We chose one prince out of many and set up a monarchy to rule Saudi Arabia. We supported the Taliban. We sold weapons to Saddam Hussein that allowed him to enslave his people. And now this. Can you blame them for being pissed?

So then (my line of thinking goes..), why is the US doing all this stuff over in the middle east? We don't interfere on this level anywhere else... And I have come up with two reasons: religion and money.

Religion: The US is a largely Christian country. Christian mythology tells a story of Jews, a persecuted lot who are actually God's chosen people but, because of their status as "chosen" they were prophesied to be preyed upon by aggressors for centuries before returning to power. Some powerful Christian people (especially among the neoconservatives) have sought to "fulfill God's word". Doing "God's work" they helped create and now support a Jewish state. The largely Islamic popluation of the middle-east doesn't have this same prophesy and they don't appreciate our ousting the Palestinians and expecting other countries to just take in these poor refugees at all.

Money: The middle east has only one resource that the US really, really wants -- oil. And a handful of very rich Americans have had oil companies over there taking that oil -- oil that doesn't belong to them in the first place -- and selling it to our population for a long, long time. Like a dealer who gives his future customer that first rock of crack cocaine, these folks have kept oil prices artificially low here for a long time, creating an addicted market while actively fighting conservation efforts and alternative energy research. These oil heavys have always tried to use our military to protect their interests. In effect, they see the US military as their personal army ready to protect them when something happens over there that threatens their financial interests. Until recently, they have at least been somewhat limited in their ability to utilize our military in this way but today we have a presidential team made up of two very recently ex-oil men ... and everything has changed. Secret meetings with Enron, drilling in our wildlife preserves, erradicating conservation programs, ignoring alternative energy possibilities and research -- in fact one of Bush's first acts in office was to lower the automobile fuel efficiency standards that had been implemented by Clinton. I can't help it. In my mind's eye, I picture GW dancing maddly around a vat of burning fuel singing, "Burn baby burn!" waving the bible in one hand and stuffing his pockets with the other.

We have got to wake up. Open our eyes. Get our news from alternative media sources inside and outside this country so we have multiple perspectives of what's going on. Study and learn from history. Listen.

Moshe Dayan once said, "If you want peace, you do not talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies."

We must try to understand our enemy and we must examine our own role in the middle east to determine where to go in the future.

If the only tool we have in our diplomacy toolbox is a hammer, you can bet your ass we're gonna see every single problem as a nail to be beaten.

posted by c -- on Dec 30, 2004 02:44PM

OK Jason, I’ll explain. What I was trying to do was to get you to see that it is useless to just make a few bold or thinly veiled statements attempting to undermine something that someone has obviously put a lot of time into. It adds nothing, it only begets acrimony, and it creates divisions. (That’s where the trolls are happy.)

You now know how it feels when someone says something that you suspect is directed vaguely at you but that you don’t quite understand completely. Troll, lib, neocon, whatever the label, the only occasion for such a label is when someone wants to ostracize and anger. As you will see if you take the time to find out, in this great debate that is American politics there are underlying ideas that almost everyone can agree with, be it that voter fraud is bad, or that war is bad, whatever. In the end we are all a lot closer in our positions than it appears at first blush, and perhaps it is wise to recognize that before going off on someone. Another wise course of action (not that I’m necessarily wise, I feel like starting to sound all preachy – not where I wanted to go with this), at least in a discussion like this, is if you feel strongly enough to respond to something, take the time to explain what you think, put some thought into it. One side effect is that you may find that you don’t think what you think you think.

Personally, I’ve read many things that challenge my positions on things, political, metaphysical, philosophical, and the knee jerk reaction is to say “HELL NO! You’re WRONG, ASSHOLE!” …Which gets us nowhere but down. (Except that it’s kind of funny calling Plato an asshole…) The trick is to identify what you disagree with and why you disagree with it, then recognize everything you do agree with. Think on it, ruminate, THEN proceed with the argument. Carolyn made a significant effort to compile some info for the rest of us and to offer an interpretation, if you have additional information that makes you think differently (you alluded to a one sided analysis), let’s see it. Give us the whole story. Perhaps you’re right and if you were to make the same sort of significant effort instead of just thumbing your nose at the whole thing, you wouldn’t get so much shit. Give respect and you’ll get respect. Oh yeah, and leave the labels out. Maybe then I won’t have to make myself look like an ass demonstrating the negativity and silliness inherent in them. And I don’t think you’re a troll, I think you’re a drummer that I’ve known for a long time and who’s been posting to this website for almost as long. However, I do think you should beware of trolls. And rifts.

posted by Clint Phipps on Dec 30, 2004 09:55PM

I didn't disrespect anyone; I offered my opinion. I didn't slam anyone; I didn't make any insulting comments directed at anyone. I wasn't trying to undermine anyone. I was just writing my opinion. Don't let your feelings of disagreement with me cause you to believe that I did something that I didn't. There are plenty of one-sided arguements in this thread; it is unfair to lecture me because I disagree with you and Carolyn. I know Carolyn spent a lot of time with her comments and I respect that. I think you must have misunderstood my comments. I felt that I explained myself fully and I didn't react in a knee-jerk manner. I understand how debates work; I am a political science minor. Oh well, you think the way you think and that's fine; its what makes this board possible. No hard feelings.

Carolyn, you asked for some information about GOP offices being robbed. Here is a brief summary. If you want to find out more, you can just use google. Bad things happen on both sides; it is simply my desire that you acknowledge that. I'll be the first to admit that the republicans are guilty of unethical tactics--just look at Tom Delay, for example.

posted by -- on Jan 04, 2005 12:50PM

Jason I appreciate your opinion and the courage you’ve shown in writing about it. The hard time you are getting right now is not about your opinion. It is about the way you offered it. There were two problems with it – lack of analysis and name calling. So, to be clear, it is not your opinion that sparked response, it was the way it was offered.

Word games are a common form of propaganda and name calling is one of the foremost of those word games. That’s what happened on this board – Name calling. In this case, the name was “Lib”. Now I know that Ann Coulter and her colleagues scream such words from the a.m. dial, all day, every day, but it is wrong. Name calling is bad. That’s why our mothers made such a big deal about it.

I am sure you are learning about the propaganda model in Poli Sci. Name calling is commonly used in an attempt to distract the uninformed observer from the message by attacking the messenger. This technique tries to link a person, or idea, to a negative symbol.

The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject the person/idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of considering available evidence. The idea is to sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule and then associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. The hope is that such names will cause others to shrink from support out of fear of also gaining the negative label. The by-product is that you avoid dealing with ISSUE. Look at us now. We’re debating name calling instead of analyzing the issue of voter fraud, intimidation and error.

But there is a backlash inherent in name calling too and we are also seeing it here on this board. Name calling can also indicate that the propagandist is either unwilling or unable to conduct a positive discussion. When this occurs, the propagandist’s argument is rendered ineffective and their future arguments are crippled.

Taken altogether, name calling hurts the democratic process. Why? Because informed debate is essential to democracy. It is how we create an informed electorate.

Mom was right. Names do hurt. The old aphorism, “Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me” was wrong. Names lead to wars, they lead to violence, they lead to aggression and they sully important discussions that we need to have as individuals, as community members, as countrymen and as human beings.

I commit to not name call.

Who's with me?

posted by c -- on Jan 04, 2005 04:25PM

I didn't call you any names. Lib refers to liberals, and it is liberals who claim that GWB did not legally win the election. You make things way to complicated. If you are a liberal, you should be proud to accept that title and not be scared of it. My purpose for adding to this thread was to try to add another side to the one-sided posts. I was trying to bring to light the fact that corrupt and unethical political actions come from both sides. You are naive if you think that the republicans are the only ones who play "dirty tricks", as you say. I also did not call you a name.

My opinions did not lack analysis. It is simply your hope that if I analyze things further, that I will being to think like you and agree with you. You folks should argue with me and post responses that disagree with me instead of saying "oh your posts lack content, they lack analysis, they are too mean..etc"

Obviously you disagree with me and that's fine. If you wan't to continue to believe that republicans are the only ones engaged in voter fraud and other unethical practices, while you claim that you can't find any evidence of democrats committing voter fraud/intimidation, then that's great too. Sometimes its not that you can't find something; it's that you only find what you want to find.

posted by -- on Jan 04, 2005 07:48PM

And, as I said before, if YOU can find evidence of democratic voter fraud, please list it. I have looked and I didn't find it. I can't make it up just because you are displeased by it's absence. If you know of such voter fraud, please, present it.

To say that both sides do it so it's okay is a cop out. It's a way of making it okay.

Voter fraud is not okay.

Voter intimidation is not okay.

Errors that results in lost votes are not okay.

And "Libs" is a name. My name is Carolyn.

posted by c -- on Jan 04, 2005 09:29PM

If you're like me, lately you might almost wish you were Ukranian. Watching how our media covered their post-election struggle while ignoring our own makes me feel sick to my stomach. We hear next to nothing about the recounts, hearings, lawsuits and sworn statements of those who claim to have witnessed high crimes right here in the US. Reports of significant differences between Exit Polls and Vote Counts were enough to spark resistance in the Ukraine (God bless 'em & congrats to them) while here, in the land of the free, we find our TV networks mixing in vote counts with exit poll data on election night and now refusing to release the original, raw US Exit Poll data to Rep. Conyers and the Judiciary

Follow this link to learn more & then tell someone what you think.

The whole world also now knows what went on in Ohio and other states on Election Day, and we simply can't let it happen anymore.
We know that many Americans in inner cities were prevented from voting by eight-hour lines. We know that local officials changed the rules on which votes they counted. We know that technicians from computerized voting companies were allowed to tamper with balloting machines unsupervised.

Elections with those sorts of problems are not honest.

The winners of these tainted elections assert that their outcomes didn’t depend on the fraud. But in sports, referees don’t wait until the outcome of the game is in jeopardy before calling penalties and enforcing the rules. Nowhere in the Constitution does it describe some acceptable level of denying Americans their votes. When Congress meets this Thursday, January 6, we’ll have a good opportunity to make it clear that Americans want every vote counted, period.

That same Constitution also directs Congress to ratify the result of the presidential election in order to make it official. This Thursday, Representative John Conyers (D-Michigan) plans to challenge the voting tally from his state, and if even one senator joins him, Congress will be compelled to debate the widespread problems that have been exposed. This Congress isn’t going to overturn the election, but it would be forced into a debate that would serve as a national teach-in on voting rights, computer voting that can’t be audited and the continued suppression of minority votes. In short — Honest Elections or not?

Click here to send a message to your senators. One senator is all we need. It’s important and the time is now.

posted by c -- on Jan 04, 2005 09:46PM

Don't put words in my mouth; I never said that it was ok because both sides do it. I was trying to tell you that its not just republicans who engage in unethical practices, which is what you were basically claiming. I also did not call you a lib. Please read my posts before you put words in my mouth. I am sorry that you have misunderstood my statements.
posted by -- on Jan 04, 2005 11:57PM

Here are some typical conservative articles that point out alleged voter fraud by democrats (I post these only because Carolyn asked. There are thousands of sites that accuse republicans of essentially the same thing)

This article talks about the unethical actions of several political action groups that are connected to the DNC

This has some allegations of bribery (sorry for the long URL)

Another URL, which discusses unethical practices when it comes to voter registration cards....

More on the wonderful PAC ACORN...

Problems exist on both sides; no, this doesn't make it ok. But it is a reality-check for people who believe that their side is completely innocent (I'm not saying that anyone on this board believes that). Instead of approaching this widespread problem in a partisan manner, we must unite and stop it together as Americans. This crap with the republicans saying that its all the democrats fault, and vice-versa, will get us nowhere. It should not be republicans vs. democrats, it should be Americans vs. those who commit voter fraud.

posted by -- on Jan 05, 2005 12:25AM

Yes, as we should get our information from non-biased reporting if we can find it. Jason, you will not find it on your conservative websites. Can you find any of these stories in AP reports? I don't have the time or patience to double check all those conservative sites, nor to subject myself to their abuse.

Every time I check out one of the stories on these sites, they turn out to be smoke and mirrors -- all obfuscation and manipulation.

My information, on the other hand, you can simply google and find.

Can you offer the same non-biased, replicatable data for us here on the board? It seems only fair.

posted by c -- on Jan 05, 2005 12:38AM

I say the governments dumb. Screw the Repubs, screw the Democs... The Indians had it right, we're slowly killing our planet. And we killed the indians...the ones that had the right idea. Damn it we suck...maybe we're a cancer.
posted by StU aRt on Jan 05, 2005 01:09PM

Can you prove that those articles are lies? I already pointed out that they are conservative sites and I have never been to them before. And for your information, I found them by googling, as you suggested I do. Probably only took me 5 minutes. You shouldn't make assumptions about how I gather information. You also shouldn't make assumptions about the content of the URL's if you won't even bother to read them.

In fact, in your original post you didn't cite information or provide any evidence that your sources were non-biased.

However, I suppose it is pointless to argue with someone who always casts aside any material that doesn't align with her or her opinion... You can't just say "nuh-uh" simply because certain material doesn't share the same opinions as you. That, in itself, is being biased and non-objective--which leads to the poor reporting and journalism that we see today.

Like I said before, it should be Americans vs. those who commit voter fraud, not republicans vs democrats and vice-versa. We can only stop these people if we come together as a whole to stop these acts instead of blaming the political parties. It is so naive to assume that only republicans break the law when it comes to unethical voting practices.

posted by -- on Jan 05, 2005 09:11PM

Jason it's also not fair to just dump a bunch of conservative websites in a post and call it analysis. That’s like boasting you can do a term paper and then asking me to do your homework.

I am glad that we agree that voter fraud is wrong. All instances must be investigated.

You seem sure that both parties engaged in voter fraud at least equally. If I agreed to that, however, I would be dismissing the fact that I found not evidence that that is the case. I didn’t see it and I’m not going to presume it exists when I found no evidence of it. That's why I say if you have instances to share, please post them here. See, accusations without evidence smacks of, "Well you do it toooooo..." to me. It's an excuse. A rationalization. And tossing out accusations without evidence is another propaganda tool. It is a diversionary ploy. As is asking me to do your research for you.

So here's the deal...If you believe it that strongly, convince us. Produce stories of democratic voter fraud that we can verify. I'll read your analysis. I’d be honored to. But I'm not going to wade through a bunch of propaganda to do your convincing for you. That’s a cop out. Analysis is like a book report. You are responsible for the research. Have you even read what you’re quoting? If so, it should be easy to distill it for the rest of us but, again, it's not fair to ask me to do it for you.

Plus, I get frustrated and bored debunking spin all the time. I know someone's gotta do it but it makes me feel like a hamster running in a wheel. It's never ending. There’s always more spin where that came from…

Let me tell you how I gathered the information in my article.

Starting about five days before the election, the headlines on my yahoo home page started going nuts with all these reports of attempts to manipulate the vote. Tons of them. Every paper was reporting these stories and they were coming from all over the country. That’s what got my attention. The pure scale of it all! My yahoo headlines are the AP, Reuters, AFP, Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and Court TV. Those were my sources. Pretty mainstream.

Well, there were so many reports coming from so many places, that I couldn’t keep them all straight. I started to be afraid some of this stuff would fall through the cracks. Also, if I wanted to be able to talk intelligently about these issues, I knew I would need to be able to back up what I was saying. So I started compiling a list, the list I shared here.

Jason, I didn't selectively choose my topic. I promise. I didn’t leave out a single democratic indiscretion. I give you my word on that. And that’s all I can do. Well, almost all. I may not be able to make you believe me but I can encourage you to convince your SELF. It seems the only way to convince you is to ask YOU to prove what you say. If you don’t find the evidence you’re looking for, perhaps you’ll consider other possibilities, possibilities like the one I suggested at the outset of this whole thread – that these abuses are not aberrations but the inevitable result of a Republican Party culture in which dirty tricks that distort the vote are rewarded, not punished.

Such behavior must be punished -- no matter who does it.

Tomorrow Congress decides whether or not to launch a federal investigation of this whole affair. Another senator is needed to bring it to the floor. I don't know what will happen.

In the meantime, lawsuits, lawsuits, everywhere. Chuck McGee appears headed to jail. Sproul and Associates have had charges filed against them in two states and are being investigated in a third.

Watch the news.

posted by c -- on Jan 06, 2005 01:15AM

I can't believe that in this discussion I neglected to bring up the 66-page DNC manual that called for democrats to launch "a premptive-strike" if no signs or evidence of voter fraud was discovered to have taken place by republicans. Here is a link to the article. This article also discusses ACORN's ties to the DNC and its unethical tactics. ACORN is presently being investigated by the state of Florida for unethical voting practices.

An excerpt from the article: "If no signs of intimidation have emerged yet, launch a pre-emptive strike," the manual said.
The manual, dated November 2004, also said Democrats should rely on party officials, minority organizations and civil rights leaders to denounce Republican tactics to discourage people from voting. It also said Democratic Party officials should assist in placing stories in the press by providing "talking points."

Do you still honestly feel that no democrats have comitted voter fraud? Does every democrat alive have some kind of gene that prevents them from doing it? Come on, be realistic. There are bad people and criminals on both sides. Perhaps there are more cases of republicans committing voter fraud--I'm not here to argue that point. The point is that it is far from the truth to say that it only happens on one side.

However, I am sure that the Washington Times will somehow be penned as a biased and unworthy source, which will allow its content to be deemed unworthy and "not worth reading."

posted by -- on Jan 06, 2005 01:16AM

You didn't ask for analysis, you asked for articles describing possible instances of voter fraud that were committed by democrats. I'm not going to sit here and paraphrase every one of them, especially when its something that you can read yourself. I am providing examples to you, and then claming that because these examples exist you are wrong when you say that you can't find any articles about voter fraud committed by democrats. There is no need for analysis; you called for examples and you got them. However, because you deem them as "conservative" they aren't worth reading and they must be false.

I'm not copping out at all. Voter fraud is wrong, everyone should be punished democrats and republicans alike. My whole point during this entire thread is that it is not fair to say that only republicans commit these acts.

posted by -- on Jan 06, 2005 01:24AM

The Washington Times is a highly biased, highly conservative paper.

Calling references to a bunch of conservative spin sites "Analysis" is the height of intellectual laziness.

It appears you are either unable or unwilling to do your own analysis.

That's the problem with this country.

posted by c -- on Jan 06, 2005 10:46AM

Today, members of Congress meet to certify the results of the 2004 presidential election. We must demand that Congress commit itself this year to reforming the electoral system, not squander the opportunity as the Republicans did after 2000.

A Presidential election is a national federal election. We should have the same standards in every single state…but we don’t. We have different standards in different states for casting and counting votes. We are the richest, most technologically advanced society in the world. We have the resources to do something about this. If we don't, we have to ask ourselves, "Why?"

Florida 2000 was a wake up call but the Republicans who controlled Congress ignored it. Will they now ignore 2004 as well? I mean, they have control, so it’s up to them. Will they do the right thing? The ethical thing?

We’ll soon know.

In the meantime, I urge everyone to demand that congressional leaders hold full hearings into this important issue. Let them hear from you TODAY. Help hold them accountable.

Here are the two most important phone numbers to call:

Speaker Dennis Hastert: 1-202-225-0600
Leader Bill Frist: 1-202-224-3135

It's critical to our democracy that we investigate and act to prevent voting irregularities and voter intimidation across the country. We can't stand still as Congressional leaders seek to sweep well-founded voter concerns under the rug.

Please join with me in calling Speaker Hastert and Leader Frist and telling them that you want action on election reform now.

posted by c -- on Jan 06, 2005 11:05AM

christ! you guys should start a whole new website.
posted by Tim - on Jan 07, 2005 07:12AM

For seriously.....maybe y'all could start being pen pals or somn.....e-mail each other....hey why dont ya switch numbers and talk!!
posted by StU aRt on Jan 07, 2005 09:49AM

Okay, okay, okay. You’re right, of course. I apologize Jason. I apologize everyone else too. I just get so exasperated at the rationalizations that allow this kind of thing to go on under the auspices that “everybody does it’. I don’t believe everybody does do it. I think some people from both sides do it but I also believe that the Republican Party has made it campaign policy instead of just the occasional aberration of a disgruntled citizen. All I’m saying is examine the info and decide for yourself.

That said, I will drop it.

So, here’s where we are now...

Yesterday Senator Barbara Boxer joined Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones and objected to certifying the Ohio Electoral College vote. Girl Power. Gotta love it!

You’ll remember that four years ago, in 2000, after another election marked by widespread voting problems, every single senator stood by silently and let it pass. There was no investigation. There was not even an attempt at election reform. And, as a result, things have gone from bad to worse.

But this time, Senator Boxer stood up. Her challenge has focused national attention to this crisis in our democracy. It prompted a two hour debate on voting and elections yesterday and, hopefully, things will not end there.

Unfortunately Sen. Boxer is already under attack from the conservative forces who approve, (as evidenced by their complete lack of action to remedy these issues) the voting problems that shut out large numbers of voters -- disproportionately minorities.

I encourage concerned citizens to write the editors of their local papers. Express your support for Senator Boxer. Demand election reform.

This time the ball is rolling. Let’s keep it rolling. It’s up to us.

posted by c -- on Jan 07, 2005 03:12PM

Senator Boxer's Statement On Her Objection To The Certification Of Ohio's Electoral Votes
January 6, 2005

For most of us in the Senate and the House, we have spent our lives fighting for things we believe in -- always fighting to make our nation better.

We have fought for social justice. We have fought for economic justice. We have fought for environmental justice. We have fought for criminal justice.

Now we must add a new fight -- the fight for electoral justice.

Every citizen of this country who is registered to vote should be guaranteed that their vote matters, that their vote is counted, and that in the voting booth of their community, their vote has as much weight as the vote of any Senator, any Congressperson, any President, any cabinet member, or any CEO of any Fortune 500 Corporation.

I am sure that every one of my colleagues -- Democrat, Republican, and Independent -- agrees with that statement. That in the voting booth, every one is equal.

So now it seems to me that under the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees the right to vote, we must ask:

Why did voters in Ohio wait hours in the rain to vote? Why were voters at Kenyan College, for example, made to wait in line until nearly 4 a.m. to vote because there were only two machines for 1300 voters?

Why did poor and predominantly African-American communities have disproportionately long waits?

Why in Franklin County did election officials only use 2,798 machines when they said they needed 5,000? Why did they hold back 68 machines in warehouses? Why were 42 of those machines in predominantly African-American districts?

Why did, in Columbus area alone, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 voters leave polling places, out of frustration, without having voted? How many more never bothered to vote after they heard about this?

Why is it when 638 people voted at a precinct in Franklin County, a voting machine awarded 4,258 extra votes to George Bush. Thankfully, they fixed it -- but how many other votes did the computers get wrong?

Why did Franklin County officials reduce the number of electronic voting machines in downtown precincts, while adding them in the suburbs? This also led to long lines.

In Cleveland, why were there thousands of provisional ballots disqualified after poll workers gave faulty instructions to voters?

Because of this, and voting irregularities in so many other places, I am joining with Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now.

Our democracy is the centerpiece of who we are as a nation. And it is the fondest hope of all Americans that we can help bring democracy to every corner of the world.

As we try to do that, and as we are shedding the blood of our military to this end, we must realize that we lose so much credibility when our own electoral system needs so much improvement.

Yet, in the past four years, this Congress has not done everything it should to give confidence to all of our people their votes matter.

After passing the Help America Vote Act, nothing more was done.

A year ago, Senators Graham, Clinton and I introduced legislation that would have required that electronic voting systems provide a paper record to verify a vote. That paper trail would be stored in a secure ballot box and invaluable in case of a recount.

There is no reason why the Senate should not have taken up and passed that bill. At the very least, a hearing should have been held. But it never happened.

Before I close, I want to thank my colleague from the House, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Her letter to me asking for my intervention was substantive and compelling.

As I wrote to her, I was particularly moved by her point that it is virtually impossible to get official House consideration of the whole issue of election reform, including these irregularities.

The Congresswoman has tremendous respect in her state of Ohio, which is at the center of this fight.

Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones was a judge for 10 years. She was a prosecutor for 8 years. She was inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame in 2002.

I am proud to stand with her in filing this objection.

posted by c -- on Jan 07, 2005 04:24PM

#1: I never said that everyone does it. I said it happens on both sides.

#2: I never said that because both sides do it that it is ok. I have repeatedly said that anyone who committs this needs to be punished and that the only way to accomplish this is to be realistic and unpartisan.

#3: Carolyn, you began this thread stating that you had done a large amount of research on this topic. I felt that you missed events and reports in your research, mainly the fact that you repeatedly said that there were no reports of voter fraud by democrats. You also said, "if there is any evidence of voter fraud by democrats, I'd like to see it. You asked me for it, and I showed it to you. Don't ask me to complete your research for you. I showed you examples, but you refuse to read them or even admit that they could possibly be true because you have penned them as conservative sites. Perhaps you would be better served if your research methods were not biased. You asked for information and I gave it to you. If you want to complete your research project, read the material first and then judge whether or not you feel that it is legitamate. This is your research project, not mine. Don't ask me for evidence and then when I give it to you wonder why I didn't paraphrase it for you.

With this being said (and it is just my opinion) I have been pleased, even though I disagree with you, that your positions are educated and well thought out. I don't know how many anti-bush folks I have seen that say they don't like him and his policies for reasons such as "just because I don't." I applaud you and the majority of others on this board for actually being educated when it comes to having positions on these important topics.

posted by -- on Jan 07, 2005 04:58PM

Jason, I did start checking out your information ... then I gave up. There were two reasons for that. One, so much of what I found was assumption, bias, outright deceit or general propaganda and, TWO, and most importantly, going to conservative websites for information is a complete insult to me as a progressive. To go to those sites, I must subject myself to slanders, insults, ads that are infuriating and aspersions in general. I won't do that to make someone else's argument for them. It's not fair to ask me to. That's why I asked for your analysis. You seem like a grounded kind of guy and I think you could tell me anything I needed to know without me having to subject myself to abuse. But you won't so I am dropping it.

I will continue to update this thread with news as it arises.

Thanks, everyone, for your patience.

posted by c -- on Jan 07, 2005 11:32PM

You two have been so busy being political that you missed one of the more interesting points: that perhaps the government as a whole is a problem, not just one side. Thank you Greg for positing that one, glad to see someone is still thinking outside the box. As Plato once said, "Democracy passes into despotism." Or as Emerson put it: "Democracy becomes a government of bullies tempered by editors." Could it be that American democracy has become so corrupt with partisan politics that everyone has lost sight of the ball? Could it be that the idea of democracy has actually become, and this would be the ultimate irony, the curtain that hides what's really going on in the governing of America from the people so as to remove "we the people" from the equations of leadership and government entirely? When in the land of the free, where democratic republicanism is the shining light of the free world (to string together a few clichés), the very basis of the democratic process is called into question by either or both of the two significant political parties, what does this say about the state of things? You two can argue the finer points of political propaganda until your blue in the face, the fact remains that there are bigger goals out there, and you can bet that the bigger fish in the sea have their eyes on them, not the petty finger pointing and the silly labeling that's going on here. They start it perhaps, but who do you think gets caught up in it? When there's a question about basic rights or basic ideals that this country is founded on, it doesn't matter who wins, everyone loses. I'm not being anti-bush about this, I think that ANYONE who wins by deception, fraud, or by compromising the foundational concepts of our country is liable to sell us ALL up the river if it suits his or her needs, it's a fact of life, and it's dangerous. Even the merest whiff on the wind of a threat to democracy or a core value, should make us all sit up and say, "Wait a second..." (Kudos to Carolyn for actually doing just that.) Kinda like in Ukraine. That we don't makes me wonder just how near the end is. All empires fall.
They say Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Contrary to what philosophers may have said, Nietzsche comes to mind, I don't believe that we are all driven by a will to power, at least in the traditional political sense of power. However, those of us that are are more corruptible, are subject to unseen motives, and may therefore be more dangerous. If, however, we move beyond the individual and apply the statement to nations, by no means a logical jump considering the inherent differences, but not necessarily an untenable one, one must realize that America has been absolutely powerful for a long time. Is there any question that corruption has had ample opportunity to infect our country? And what made the Roman Empire fall? It occurs to me that perhaps these things are what this specter of voter fraud should be making us all think about rather than those crazy constitution flouting libs with their bumper stickers.
As for how this post has gone, it's like the shade of George Washington is haunting us saying "Beware of political partisanship." And like our forefathers, nobody's bothering to listen.
posted by Clint Phipps on Jan 09, 2005 03:42AM

I agree, Clint. We need to focus on the problem, which is why I kept saying "it should be Americans vs. those who commit voter fraud instead of democrats vs. republicans and vice-versa."

As for your points about how America has been powerful for a long time and how it may fall one day, I agree. Your words reminded me of something that Alexander Tyler once said...
At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinburgh) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From Bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."

Tyler's thoughts really make you wonder about the fate of America and if and when our system could collapse. Now it is possible to spin his remarks and use them to argue a conservative or liberal viewpoint. One could say that "republicans have a loose fiscal policy, so they will cause the collapse and then assume power with a dictatorship." Another person could argue that "the democrats always promise the most gives from the 'public treasury', so eventually everyone will always vote for them and spending will get out of control and result in bankruptcy, which will be followed by a dictatorship. There are also several other feasible arguements that can be made. Either way you tend to think, Clint and Tyler's comments should concern everyone. America may perhaps be invincible when it comes to competition from other nations (military speaking or economical speaking); however, if it ever does fall, I feel that it will be because it destroyed itself (just my opinion).

Now since I am a conservative, I will add a conservative analysis of Tyler's words, which many of you have seen before. Now to be fair, perhaps Clint or Carolyn (or anyone else) could find and post the liberal take (not saying that either of you two are "liberal") regarding Tyler's comments.

The following is biased and it is from Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, in St. Paul, Minnesota. These are some interesting facts that he pointed out concerning the 2000 Presidential election:
Population of counties won by:
Gore=127 million
Bush=143 million

Square miles of land won by:

States won by:

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..."

Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "apathy" and complacency" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy; with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
As you can see, Olson feels that liberal views and policies are causing the country to slowly kill itself and follow down Tyler's dark path. He feels that government dependency is spreading and could ultimately leady to the collapse of our system. While democrats may agree that government dependency is bad, they do not feel that their policies are causing it to spread. Again, that section is biased and can be refuted with a different point of view quite easily. Again, perhaps someone can enlighten the board with a liberal take on Tyler's remarks in order to be fair.

No matter what your point of view is, as Americans we need to ban together and not assume that all things bad happen only on one side. It should be Americans vs. those who commit acts that undermine our freedoms, democracy, and political system, not democrats vs. republicans and vice versa. If we do keep pointing fingers (and I wasn't trying to be partisan in my earlier posts; I said several times that things happen on both sides, which I was trying to demonstrate, and that we should unite against those who commit voter fraud instead of labeling republicans or democrats as the sole criminals) we will get nowhere and eventually we may lead ourselves to our own demise.

posted by -- on Jan 09, 2005 02:31PM

20 Amazing Facts about Voting in the US

1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.

2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.

3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.

4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

5. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.

6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.

8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.

9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.

10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.

11. Diebold is based in Ohio.

12. Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.,2645,61640,00.html

13. Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of General Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.

14. Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.

15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.

16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie here:,2645,63298,00.html

17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.

18. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.,2645,65757,00.html

19. The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.

20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.,10801,97614,00.html

posted by c -- on Jan 22, 2005 11:27PM

If an article printed in a newspaper is read and then thrown into the garbage can, does it make any sound? C'mon people! Are you really that cynical to think EVERYTHING printed in the media that offends your sensibility is "spin" and propaganda? If you ask me, THAT is what is wrong with our society...if I read something that disagrees with my internal bias, then its a lie fostered by the opposition. Let's use some common sense and stop running around like a bunch of lunatics screaming about conspiracy. I personally trust my fellow human beings, as a general rule, and will continue to do so.
posted by Cheryl -- on Jun 23, 2005 04:07PM

That reminds me of that great line: Just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean they're not out to get you...
posted by Clint Phipps on Jun 24, 2005 12:37PM

I agree Cheryl.
posted by -- on Jun 27, 2005 11:46PM

Cheryl, you just summed up one of the major points that I have been trying to make during this whole post! Just because certain people disagree with something that is printed doesn't make it a lie! No side is perfect; each side of the spectrum has its faults and that was what I was trying to point out. By adding another side to the discussion, I was trying to bring balance to the board by refuting Carolyn's claim that only republicans are involved in voter fraud. I wasn't doing this simply because I am a conservative. I wasn't arguing with her because I think my side is right; rather, I was arguing on principle--the very principle you so brilliantly pointed out! I was trying to point out that simply because information comes from sites that you don't like or don't agree with, doesn't make it lies. Much of my information was dismissed by certain people because it was "conservative", which obviously to some people means the same thing as "lies". I am so glad that someone finally realized that simply because you disagree with something you read doesn't automatically make it a pack of lies. I do believe, however, that my true intentions were overlooked and that since I am a conservative, it was automatically assumed that I was aruging with Carolyn in a solely partisan manner.
posted by -- on Jun 28, 2005 12:04AM

Jason you posted purely partisan websites in your attempt to say, "You guys do it toooooo..." and then say you're not trying to be partsan. C'mon now. You can't have it both ways. If you're not trying to be partisan, then post non-partisan information.

As to the person who said, "I trust people", well that's great. You'll be easily led. We now know that the Bush Administration pays to place its propaganda on television and in the papers. They've been busted three times! We now know that Fox News gets their daily tips straight from Karl Rove - and they call it news. How ridiculous. We now know that the White House press corp is filled with planted conservative writers whose purpose is to spin the news. Jeff Gannon let all the world know that when he was busted.

The truth is coming out. The web is coming unspun. The jig is up. And I, for one, am glad to see it.

If you don't think these folks control our media almost absolutely then tell me this, "Where are the protest songs on the radio?"

posted by c -- on Jun 29, 2005 03:20PM

What??? No more protest songs? Now I'll never get famous...

One more time - to illustrate that very point - I still think it's really sad that the Dixie Chicks (among others) got such a bunch of bullshit for exercising that inalienable right set forth in the FIRST amendment by our wonderfully liberal and progressive founding fathers... And we think political speech is the most protected. Right.

posted by Clint Phipps on Jun 30, 2005 01:47AM

Clint, I wholeheartedly agree. The Dixie Chicks, while I obviously disagree with them, do not deserve ridicule for exercising their free speech rights. That's what makes this country great. However, others do have the same right to disagree with them.

Again Carolyn, I was arguing with you on principle. Perhaps you should re-read Cheryl's post. You ask for statements that implicate democrats in actions of voter fraud, and when I give them to you, you dismiss them as "partisan lies", for the sole reason that you disagree with them. That is the problem with many of today’s liberals. They claim they are fair towards all persons, that they give everyone a fair shake, that everyone should be treated equal, and that everyone's voice should be heard--but at the same time if anything is printed or said that they don't agree with, it is instantly labeled as lies, no matter how much evidence to the contrary. This is what you had to say when I tried to bring forth views that you disagree with….

"One, so much of what I found was assumption, bias, outright deceit or general propaganda and, TWO, and most importantly, going to conservative websites for information is a complete insult to me as a progressive." Oh, so conservative websites are deceitful because….they are…..conservative? Shouldn’t something only be called deceitful when it actually is deceitful, not because you disagree with it????

And then you had this to say about the Washington Times..."The Washington Times is a highly biased, highly conservative paper.”

Does that mean that everything in the Washington times is false, for the sole reason that you think it’s a conservative paper? That must be what you mean since that was your response after I posted a link to the Times that contained a view that you disagreed with.
It would seem to me that in order to be fair you would actually wait for SOMETHING that was written in the Times to be proven false before you make such a bold statement. But no, you label things in it as not credible because you think it’s conservative.

You repeatedly asked me to post articles that accused or implicated democrats in acts of voter fraud. And when I did, you immediately would say, "sorry, those are from conservative websites, so they are untrue and not to be trusted."

Sadly, you are obviously a person who after reading something which disagrees with your own bias, automatically labels it as a lie created by the conservatives. Notice that I did not label any of your information as lies. That was the difference in the way we were arguing. You were telling me that all of my information was garbage, because you think its conservative, whereas I was simply telling you that any person is capable of voter fraud, whether they are democrats or republicans, and that no matter who they are they should be held accountable, and that it is foolish to think that all voter fraud is cause by conservatives. *cough* PAC Acorn paying people to submit false voter registration cards in exchange for crack cocaine *cough*

It is so funny when that someone tries to bring the focus to the real issue—which is that voter fraud is wrong and that ANYONE who commits it should be held accountable—there is always someone who wants to divert attention from the problem by being biased and partisan. I don't know how many times I brought reference to this point. AGAIN, it should be Americans versus those who commit voter fraud, not democrats vs. republicans. If we want to stop this problem we need to unite as a nation and do something about it instead of mudslinging and letting our own internal biases get in the way.

Obviously, I am a conservative, but it doesn't distract me from the principles of right and wrong and it doesn't cause me to believe that all conservatives are innocent and that all liberals are evil. It also doesn't cause me to so naively believe that all information that comes from a "liberal" source or all information that I disagree with is automatically a lie. I have my own views, but I am capable of respecting opposing views. Sadly, those who choose to play partisan games and label information as false and "made up" simply because it does not concur with their own internal biases are only distracting this country from coming up with solutions to its problems.

posted by -- on Jun 30, 2005 02:25PM

Jason, my sources are the Associated Press, United Press Internationals and Reuters.

I asked you politely to site non-partisan resources but you didn't. Now I realize why. You couldn't. These stories don?t exist outside the spin city of right-wing punditry.

I checked out the sites you posted. Two of them have slunk back into the night where they came from but here are the others:

The Lufkin Daily News - a small town paper in rural Texas. I'm sure there's no bias in the President's home state. - Their motto: "We are just some lonely conservative folks pushing back against liberal politics and a "progressive" culture. We're just trying to get a rational, mainstream, very practical point of view out to the denizens of the net." Their rational point of view includes a section called, "Dubious Sources" (how ironic), which they preface with this statement: "We cannot verify the source or accuracy of the documents in this section. In fact, it's entirely possible that someone may have tampered with a few of them..." (Now that's journalism...) Then they go on to post these articles: Theresa "Let Them Eat Cake" Heinz Kerry and Liberella, Defender of the Liberal Universe. - a grassroots organization that supports Alan Keyes. Here are the headlines from that site today. You tell me if they seem biased.
- "When Justices Become Dictators" by Ben Shapiro,
- "Foreign Law is Not Law" by Thomas Sowell,
- "Kentucky Man Helps Businesses Display 10 Commandments" by CBN (or Christian Broadcast News, home of Jerry Falwell's 700 Club) and, get this,
- a link to click where you can "Hear Terri Shaivo Laughing."

Jason, you have no credibility if these are your sources.

(Hear Terri Shaivo laugh. Holy Christ!)

posted by c -- on Jun 30, 2005 05:04PM - a grassroots organization that supports Alan Keyes.
Here are the headlines from that site today. You tell me if they seem
- "When Justices Become Dictators" by Ben Shapiro,
- "Foreign Law is Not Law" by Thomas Sowell,
- "Kentucky Man Helps Businesses Display 10 Commandments" by CBN (or
Christian Broadcast News, home of Jerry Falwell's 700 Club) and, get
this, - a link to click where you can "Hear Terri Shaivo Laughing."

Is there some kind of problem with someone having these kinds of opinions? So, you are STILL saying that because those sites have those kinds of views, they must be not credible and are full of lies. You are doing an excellent job of reinforcing the point of my last post. Why can't someone write about how international law shouldn't be US law? Why can't someone have the opinion that the 10 commandements should be displayed in public? According to you, anyone who thinks this way is a liar. You can't seem to tolerate anyone with a different view, and if you do tolerate them, they are still liars. If you don't agree with something, it is automatically a lie fostered by the opposition. This reminds me of Communism. Don't worry, I won't pull a Dick Durbin and call you a Nazi.

What about the DNC manual that I posted, which gave specific instructions for Democrats to create stories of voter fraud if none were already in the news? OH WAIT, that came from the Washington Times, which you have penned as conservative so its just a silly bunch of conservative lies!

"The Lufkin Daily News - a small town paper in rural Texas. I'm sure there's no bias in the President's home state."

AGAIN, you have labeled that source as conservative because it is in Texas, which is the President's home state. So, you are AGAIN saying that because something is conservative, that it is a lie. So,is anything that comes out of Texas biased, because its Bush's home state? What about a democrat who lives in Texas? Is everything that comes out of his mouth a lie because he is from the President's home state? Please......

And you still choose to ignore PAC Acorn, which is a liberal group funded by George Soros and, which paid people with cash and crack cocaine to file false voter registration cards, including the names Marry Poppins and Dick Tracy. They also illegally registered thousands of felons to vote.

Acorn publically idetifies itself with liberal causes, so I am categorizing it as a liberal group, but--unlike you--I will stop short of calling everyone associated with it a liar because it is a liberal group. The fact that they are being accused of vote fraud is common knowledge and is in the public record because they are currently being sued and the case in in litigation as we speak. Perhaps they are innocent, but testimony exists to the contrary. I don't believe Acorn committed vote fraud because its a liberal group, that's not the case. This has happened because certain people in that group decided to do that thing. People don't do these things because they are republicans or democrats, they do it because they are BAD!!! Why can't people realize this? I am only trying to point out that its not just conservatives that engage in these acts.

If you have read ANY news lately, you surely would have heard about the Gubernatorial election in Washington state, where over 1000 felons illegally voted as well as many dead people, people who don't exist etc. The sad thing was, is that the election was decided by 129 votes, with over 1000 votes being illegal. You don't see Christine Gregoire, the democratic winner, fighting to make sure that the felon vote doesn't count, which is what the law says.

If you have read the AP in the last year you surely would have noticed the GOP offices that were broken into and vadalized. One office was sprayed with bullets, but luckily nobody was injured. If only the Democrats would treat terrorism that way!

In Madison, Wis., someone burned an 8-foot-by-8-foot Nazi swastika on a homeowner's lawn, which had been decorated with Bush-Cheney signs. The vandals used grass killer to spray the hate symbol (it's OK, Bush-hating trumps environmentalism). Several other homes nearby were vandalized.

In Orlando, Fla., Democrats stormed the local Bush/Cheney headquarters, and the ensuing melee resulted in physical injuries to at least two Republican campaign workers. The liberal protesters justified their actions -- including ramming the head of one of the workers into an office door -- by blaming President Bush's "negative campaign." But that story must be completely fabricated because it came from, which is a "conservative site". Wouldn't people be in trouble if they made up stories? The only journalists I can think of that got in trouble over fabricating stories came ironically from the New York Times, one being Jayson Blair. But he was probably from Texas, due to the fact that he lied....

Most of your AP and Reuters sources don't specifally implicate any repblicans either, they just point out voting irregularities, like felons voting.

Speaking about felons voting, why is it that Republicans want to enforce the current laws and keep felons from illegally voting, while democrats seem to have no problem with it--we even see Hillary Clinton commenting on TV in support of changing the law so that felons are allowed to vote. Why do you think this is? It MIGHT have something to do with the fact that studies have shown that felons tend to vote (when they vote illegally) and would vote for the democrats in large percentages...(

You are a typical kool-aid drinker and one who will stop at nothing to distract people from finding a solution to America's problems. Why is it--and I know I am repeating myself--that we can't embrace the concept of how it should be American's vs. those who commit voter fraud instead of tring to completely blame the other side. Both sides are obviously at fault here, as any intelligent person can see by reading both my posts and Carolyn's posts. She will have you believe that anyone who is a registered democrat is absolutely incapable of commiting an act of voter fraud. How can this be possible? Must be something in their DNA.

Why haven't any republican officials been indicted or tried on charges of voter fraud? Why hasn't the republican party, and its "culture of dirty tricks" as you like to call it, been brought down by this "irrefutable" proof that you have that all voting fraud is a conspiracy created by the "evil conservatives"????

Of course everyone has a bias, I have a bias, you have a bias, fans on this site have a bias in favor of Phlux (which isn't a bad thing), but just because someone is biased in a way that you don't agree with doesn't make them evil liars.

*Disclaimer* I know someone who went on vacation in Texas and visited a place near Crawford, Texas--which is near Bush's ranch. Therefore, according to certain liberals, anything I say or do is most likely a lie created by conservatives*

posted by -- on Jun 30, 2005 09:02PM

Name calling -- again. So predictable. (It's just like Fox News!)

Look, the problem with getting your information from the sites you use is that they only tell one side of the story. They do not investigate stories. They do not even try for balance like a real journalist with standards would -- like the ones from the wire services. They cherry-pick stories, often from obscure sources, editorialize it, leave out any other side and mislead readers. You're a smart guy. I know you realize this.

I have said all along that every American has the right to vote and have their vote count and all irregularites should be investigated. You know this too. Still, you attacked me for calling the Republicans on their chicanery and insisted the dems did it too. Maybe they do. They're human. All I ever said was "prove it".

Now you have shown us your sources. Let the readers decide for themselves. I think we are done here.

Oh, and I understand why you reverted to name calling - again. I'd be embarrassed too.

posted by c -- on Jun 30, 2005 10:50PM

I'm just calling it like I see it. If you see something that doesn't agree with your own internal bias, then its automatically a lie created by the conservatives. But if its something that came from a liberal source, then its as true as the world is round. I don't think its unfair to classify you as a kool-aid drinker.

Oh, and now Fox News is one of these evil entities that invents stories? I think they accurately reported about the Tsunami event, the Natalee Holloway case, and Tom Cruise's engagement to Katie Holmes. But wait, you must be talking about those political stories/views that you don't agree with. I almost forgot, if you don't agree with a viewpoint its automatically a lie. The word disagree and the world false were not synonyms the last time I checked.

posted by -- on Jun 30, 2005 11:04PM

No, I guess with Fox "News" I'm thinking of the "invented news stories" that accidentally find their way onto their website like, say, the one that said John Kerry was into giving manicures. Turns out is was a "mistake" put there by Carl Cameron, their lead reporter.

Their great white leader dismissed the fake story with this statement: "'Last week, we experienced separate lapses of judgment, resulting in the posting, on our website, of inaccurate material,' Moody writes. 'Credibility is our lifeblood. When we make factual mistakes, we affect adversely all the hard work that we've done for eight years to become the country's leading news channel.' He calls Cameron's quotes a 'stupid parody' that was included in the scripts queue, then picked up and added 'unthinkingly' to the web site.

Of course, Cameron was never punished.

Yeah, now that's journalistic intergity. Go ahead. Site them too. You're making my argument for me.

posted by c -- on Jul 01, 2005 12:50AM

Do you really think that wrongly stating that someone likes to give manicures is a good example of a news organization being biased? Don't you think if they were outright biased they were throw something more serious than that on the website?

And just how do you know Cameron wasn't punished?

If that's bad, then please tell me what you think about Jayson Blair--and the other NY genius--admitting to completely fabricating entire articles, which were printed??? I don't think I remember hearing you speaking out about that. But I would expect you to give the NY Times a free pass.

But since you label Fox News as conservative, I am sure that means that the manicure story is just scratching the surface of a much more evil and sinister conspiracy orchestrated by the evil conservatives, designed to attack the innocent liberals.

If the only example of flawed and biased journalism by Fox News you can come up with is about manicures (remember we were talking politics here) then I am not sure that you have much of a case. Fox admitted it was a mistake, but since you have labeled them as "conservative", it must be a dishonest mistake rather than an honest one.

I think you need to give me your keys; your blood kool-aid content is way over the legal limit.

posted by -- on Jul 01, 2005 01:19AM

You want examples of flawed journalism by Fox! Oh, this is gonne be fun. Not that it will matter to you. None is so blind as he who will not see. (Or so cowardly as he who name calls when he has lost an argument.)

Here's the deal with Fox. Go ahead and take your prozac now...

Rupert Murdoch owns 9 satellite TV networks, 100 cable channels, 175 newspapers, 40 book imprints, 40 TV stations and 1 movie studio. His total audience is 4.7 billion people. He is a right-wing conservative who adores Ronald Reagan. He also owns Fox (and I use this term lightly) News.

Roger Ailes, who currently runs the Fox Media Corporation for Murdoch, worked as a media strategist for Richard Nixon from 1967-1968, as a consultant for Ronald Reagan in 1984 and on George Bush Sr.’s presidential campaign in 1988.

The Fox Media Network is the conglomerate these two men have created to brainwash the people of this country and the world. Between them they have eliminated all traces of journalistic integrity from Fox’s newsroom.

Every morning Ailes, or his right hand man John Moody, circulate a memo full of edicts to every reporter who works in their world-wide organization, telling them what to say and how to say it. There is nothing covert about their efforts. These memos are based on "Talking Points" released by Karl Rove in the White House each morning. What follows are some of their actual memos to Fox employees.

3-6-2004 Kerry, starting to feel the heat for his flip-flop voting record, is in West Virginia.

4-4-2004 The President goes to Charlotte to talk about job training. Buoyed by the 300k job figure last week, he can boast his policies are working.

4-6-2004 Kerry's speech on the economy at Georgetown is likely to move onto the topic of Iraq. We should take the beginning of Kerry’s speech, see if it contains new information (aside from the promise to create 10 million new jobs) and see if other news at the time is more compelling. It is not required to take it start to finish.

4-26-2004 Ribbons or medals? Which did John Kerry throw away after he returned from Vietnam? This may become an issue for him today. His perceived disrespect for the military could be more damaging to the candidate than questions about his actions in uniform.

4-28-2004 Let's refer to the Marines we see in the foreground as "sharp shooters" not snipers, which carries a negative connotation.

5-6-2004 The pictures from Abu Ghraib prison are disturbing. They have rightly provoked outrage. Today we have a picture – aired on al Arabyia – of an American hostage being held with a scarf over his eyes, clearly against his will. Who's outraged on his behalf?

Murdoch is using his immense media power to shape the news to further his interests and those of his allies in the Bush Administration. Fox News is nothing more than a 24/7 political ad for the GOP. They don't call it the "news business" for nothing.

We have long known that Karl Rove issues "Talking Points" from his office in the West Wing of the White House and that he forwards them to conservative columnists around the country telling them what to say. This is how all the conservative pundits (from Limbaugh to MSNBC) end up saying the same thing every single day -- often in exactly the same words! Robert Novak, one of those conservative columnists, is the columnist who "outed" undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame based on one of these "tips from the White House" though he refuses to name the individual who gave it to him. (Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, had publicly condemned Cheney's use of a forged document to bolster support for invading Iraq. This forged document supposedly indicated that Niger had sold enriched Uranium to the Iraqis to build a nuclear weapon. (Though that document has since been proven a forgery, no one is asking who forged it. Hmmm...) The White House is also not trying very hard to find the person who outed Plame. Also, hmmmm.)

In addition to the daily canned message, Fox employs a number of techniques to influence the public's perceptions of the election, the Iraq War, Social Security, you name it:

First, they limit the diversity of opinion. For every one democrat interviewed on Brit Hume's Special Report, they interview five republicans.

Second, they present "wedge issues" such as gay marriage, affirmative action, abortion, religion and 10 commandments stories to divert the public's attention while they ignore the real stories of the economy, the environment and health care.

Third, they present of view of Iraq as a happy Iraq and the war as a war we are winning. Brit Hume actually said in one of his reports, "277 US soldiers have now died in Iraq, which means that statistically speaking US soldiers have less chance of dying from all causes in Iraq than citizens have of being murdered in California, which is roughly the same geographical size." (Talk about manipulating statistics!) Fox has made the decision to portray the Iraq war as a success and those who oppose it as traitors.

Fourth, they have chosen to use terrorism as a fear weapon, diverting attention from the economy, medicare and the environment.

Fifth, they intimidate the real reporters. Christiana Amanpour, the award-winning CNN correspondent who reported from Iraq, is quoted as saying, "My station was intimidated by the administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News and it did, in fact, put a climate of fear and self-censorship in my view in terms of the kind of broadcast work we did."

Sixth, the conservative "experts" on Fox News are some of the most famous people in their fields. The liberal "experts" on Fox News are not only nobodies, they choose people who are unattractive and who are not good debaters. (Let me on Fox News. I'll tear them a new asshole, just like I'm tearing you one.)

Seventh, Fox uses misleading banners that roll across the bottom of the screen, banners that say things like, "Kerry's Secret Meeting" or "Clarke's Flip-Flop" to subliminally plant these thoughts in veiwer's minds. (Now that's brain washing!)

Eighth, they regularly engage in character assassination, and never so clearly as when they attacked Richard Clarke after he told the 9/11 Commission that our government let us down. For weeks, they suggested he was "auditioning for a role in the Kerry administration" or that he was "trying to sell his book" or that he was "angry to be passed over for a position in Homeland Security". This in total disregard for his 30 years of dedicated service dating back through four administrations.

The general public's misperceptions about the Iraq war contributed to support for it. And despite the blatant consumer fraud of their mottos: "Fair and Balanced" and "We report. You decide.", "America's Newsroom" gives us headlines like this, "There was further news today that President Bush's days of absorbing John Kerry's attacks without counter-attacks are over."

Instead of providing sources for the propaganda they present, the reporters on Fox News have mastered the art of the, "Some people say..." method of expressing the opinions of their employers. I have actually heard more than one person on that station say, "Some people say that John Kerry looks French." Who says this? They do.

Carl Cameron, lead political correspondent for Fox, is friends with GW. His wife helped orchestrate Bush's campaign. This is a blatant conflict of interest. Real journalists would never do this. Take Maria Shriver, for instance, who stepped down from her media role because her husbands agenda could have influenced her. But at Fox, conflicts of interest went the way of the Fairness Doctrine back in the 80's. Remember the Fairness Doctrine? In the good ole days, we used to be able to expect equal time, to ensure both sides received the same amount of coverage on every television station. Those days are gone now. Reagan got rid of it. Coincidence? I think not. Reagan was also the first president to put neo-conservatives in his cabinet.

Where my mother lives in rural North Carolina, she gets four television stations, one of them Fox. She does not have access to high speed internet and trying to read the news from her computer is sheer torture. Even if my mother didn't watch Fox, she, like all of us, would still be exposed to the echo effect of other stations reporting on their reporting. My mother didn't like John Kerry but she couldn't give you a single reason for not liking John Kerry other than "John Kerry flip flops", a statement you can hear trumpeted 24-hours-a-day on Fox, because in Fox's black and white world there is no amount of new information that makes it acceptable to change one's mind. Just like Jason cannot change his.

(Quick aside. My mother now bitterly regrets voting for Bush. She feels misled and she was. Many people in this country are feeling that way now.)

Corporate control of the media is a political issue. Clear Channel Communications, the Sinclair Group and Fox are threatening our very freedom. For the people who are electing our leaders to make good choices, we must have complete and unbiased information from our news sources. And before you scream "Liberal Media", I say to you, "Liberal media my ass!" Conservative pundits are all over the radio but for some reason the propaganda that we have a liberal media continues to thrive. Where are the liberal radio stations? The liberal tv stations? And, yes, the protest songs on the radio? They are getting written; they are just not getting played. A colleague of mine recently spouted this "liberal media" pap to me to which I responded, "Name one liberal media pundit." She couldn't. On the other hand, we have Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Robert Novak, Brit Hume, Chris Matthews, Ann Coulter and Mark Hyman on the conservative side...and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Fox does nothing BUT biased reporting. It is no wonder Carl Cameron was not punished for posting made-up stories about John Kerry (complete with made up quotes) on the company website. He probably got a raise. Jason Blair was terminated. When Dan Ratehr made a mistake, he was terminated. But not Carl Cameron - because Fox is not real news. They are entertainment for the fearful and stupid.

We can stop them though. People are waking up to who Fox really is. Even Fox employees are stepping forward now to tell their stories. In the future (if we manage to escape this neoconservative hell!) history will write about them the way they write now about Hearst's "yellow journalism" - only worse, because now it is orchestrated by the government. (Pay no attention to the man behind the Iron curtain...)

When you see biased reporting (and you have only to look to see it) complain to the outlet. Tell them you will not be watching until they provide balanced reporting that includes progressive viewpoints as well! Furthermore, vote with your dollar. Refuse to buy the products advertised on these programs and tell those sellers why you will not be eating either Cheerios or Total (both real examples).

Democracy depends on a free and fair media to function. It is guaranteed in the third amendment to our Constitution. We must stand up for this basic right or our children will inherit a democracy that has a lot less freedoms that it had when it was placed in our hands.

Or, if you want another perspective, you can check out Jason's sources and click on a link to "hear Terri Shiavo laugh."

posted by c -- on Jul 01, 2005 04:04PM

MMMMM. Just like Ken Kesey, I like kool aid. It tastes warm and fuzzy on my tongue... So does scotch. Jason. Mr. Rock Drummer. Here's a word of advice. Choose the blue pill and chill out. Stop harassing and insulting my friends on my site and take your two year Associates' degree in Political Science to the Drudge Report. Maybe they’ll like you there. We play rock and roll. Therefore, I think I speak for the band when I step to the mike and say nice ‘n loud like any real rock band should… "Shut the fuck up!!!"
Go listen to some Dylan, Zep, Beatles, Dead, Doors, Pearl Jam, Marley... (Shall I go on?) How ‘bout some Dixie Chicks? Oh I know: “Come now you Masters of War…” If I wanna hear republican drivel I'll listen to Rush on the radio -same place you get that shite from. If you believe in it so much, why don't you enlist in your sanguine crimson team's favorite bleeding war and leave us the fuck alone? War is not cool. Greedwar is even less cool. See Owen, and that old lie, dulce et decorum est, pro patria mori. How would YOU like war and death brought to your front porch? How would you like to be an Iraqi watching your brother rot in the street under sniper fire? I say fuck anyone who puts MY country, America, on the wrong side, the BAD side. There will be a reckoning.
And another thing - obviously you've never read Plato: Republicanism is NOT Democracy (shall I explain the difference to you, for they may not have taught it very well in poli-sci 101…). Unfortunately we’re stuck with the stupid bullshit electoral college that fucked us all more than once, but remember this: one who offhandedly dismisses questions about the validity of any vote, one who supports corruption, favoritism, and the neo-aristocracy (NO ARISTOCRATIC TITLES BABY!!! And I don’t dig the de facto shit) is not a friend of Democracy. Yes I’m talking to you, J. wit da G-ride. Don't fuck with we the people and don't fuck with me, Neocon. The sweetest justice is that you'll never see a dime in your paycheck from your Rape of Iraq and your Bombing of the Cradle of Civilization that you so ardently support, and they'll bleed you for ages as you pay for it - just like they’ll bleed me. Only I didn't vote Murder for Oil. I’m with the majority, I’m with the ROCK, I’m with the ROLL: live free or DIE baby! We see through to the rotting core of the patriot-self-espionage-act and the whole flaming shebang. And so. Here we go. Over the Nixonian cuckoo’s nest again.
posted by Clint Phipps on Jul 02, 2005 03:50AM

And one more thing. You come on this site like an asshole trying to dish out shit, bring your bib. Cause you eat what you serve.
posted by Clint Phipps on Jul 02, 2005 03:52AM

This message is closed to replies