Keith Olbermann: Countdown to Voting Irregularities

[Nbadan]

:spin

Bravo to Keith Olbermann for having the the intestinal fortitude to tell the truth about the Ohio Presidential vote fraud that has been largely ignored by the corporate-owned mass media. Bravo to MSNBC for letting Olbermann expose the fraud.

Countdown to Voting Irregularties (http://home.comcast.net/~hugh.moore/countdown_on_voting_irregs.wmv)

[timvp]

Thanks for the link, Nbadan.

Call me crazy, but it's at least an interesting watch.


P.S.

Too bad Olbermann didn't stick to sports.

[Drachen]

That was actually pretty interesting and informative.

[Kori Ellis]

Yes, thanks for posting. The very interesting part to me was that the hand-counted counties in Florida did not at all reflect the party affiliation of the registered voters. But the counties that weren't hand-counted, all did. Interesting.

[Yonivore]

Y'all need to read, "If you give a moose a muffin."

Don't encourage the crazies folks...

[Drachen]

Kori, it was saying those counted by the optical counters didnt reflect the registered voters, not the hand counted ones.

[Nbadan]

Thanks everyone. Here is some support information (http://pages.ivillage.com/americans4america/id20.html) to help prove Olbermann's case. Some counties in Ohio had turnouts of 1160%.

[Drachen]

If nothing else, this has me looking forward to Dave Barry's next column.

[whottt]

No, you know what's interesting?

Looking at all those counties mentioned?

Bush won every one of them in 2000 including Warren. The ones in Florida even after the recount.

2000 Results for Warren: Bush 69% (http://www.co.warren.oh.us/bdelec/archive/general_11-00.htm)

2004 Results for Warren: Bush 72% (http://www.co.warren.oh.us/bdelec/voting_results_publish_dynamic.htm)


2000 Florida Baker, Holmes, Dixie, LaFayette, Liberty, Paper Ballot Recounted Votes (http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/cbc/flcbc.htm)

Notice how MSNBC forgot to mention that?

Notice how they failed to mention what kind of turnout there was in those counties?

It seems to me that if the Bush camp was going to rig votes they wouldn't do it in counties they had previously won by large margins.




Oh and MSNBC is more left wing trash than CNN. Ever go to their front page? Someone tell me the last time they have any type of positive article about Bush, the war in Iraq, anything.


What the Democrats need to be asking themselves is why the Kerry camp themselves illegally leaked information and tried to pass it off as exit poll data...that is fraud.

[Drachen]

whottt I have to ask, what is your handle all about?? is it hoot? or is it like lil john WHAT!!! or something else.

[Nbadan]

Some useful charts...

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/FloridaTechChart.png

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/FloridaVendorsChart.png

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/FloridaMachinesChart.png

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/VotesCastByMachine.png

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/PercentModelContribuation.png

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/OhioByTech.png

Here (http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~adamsb6/elections/) is what they all mean.

[whottt]

<<<<Is a registered Democrat.

Stop assuming that just because some Democrats didn't support a shitty candidate that there was voter Fraud.

[Drachen]

I see Whottt likes to dodge the tough questions rather than face them straight up.

Tom Cruise: What is your name all about I WANT THE TRUTH!!!

[Nbadan]

What the Democrats need to be asking themselves is why the Kerry camp themselves illegally leaked information and tried to pass it off as exit poll data...that is fraud.

Warren County did go for Bush in 2000, but it's hard to believe that Reagan-democrats supported W in greater numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000. Also, this doesn't begin to explain why there were more votes than registered voters in 30 Ohio counties.

What I wanna know is why your so afraid of the truth coming out Whott? Afraid that W will appear more illegitimate than he already does and you'll be proven an ass?

[Nbadan]

http://bushspeaks.com/img/rove-poses-for-diebold-ad.jpg

[whottt]

Warren County did go for Bush in 2000, but it's hard to believe that Reagan-democrats supported W in greater numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000. Also, this doesn't begin to explain why there were more votes than registered voters in 30 Ohio counties.

What I wanna know is why your so afraid of the truth coming out Whott? Afraid that W will appear more illegitimate than he already does and you'll be proven an ass?


No ass, what I am trying to convey to you is that I am fucking proof of the change that took place in this country, because of 911, because of the absolutely despicable left wing tactics used by Michael Moore and the like, because of heavily biased liberal media that is destroying the integrity of the press.

I am a guy who hated Bush in 2000, I voted for the Democratic candidate every year since 1992. It's not that surprising what happened in this country.

What I want to know from you Dan, is why MSNBC(and Olberman, who is the Liberal Version of Bill O'Reilly), failed to mention that those were all counties won by Bush on paper in 2000, even after the recount.......

Why didn't they mention what PCT of the registered voters in those counties turned out...


Why didn't they mention those things? Don't you think that has a little bit of relevance when trying to paint these 2004 Results as unusual?

We've already been burned by one liberal journalist whose career is pretty much over now.

I watched those fucking channels, I saw how liberally biased they were, they didn't even try to hide it...and these are supposed to be neutral journalists.


You act like the fact that there were more votes than Registered Voters in some of those counties is a Rebuplican tactic...when the Democrats were busted time and time again using that very tactic in this election, as well as buying votes. The Republicans were the ones busted throwing ballots away...there's a difference between the tactics used...and that one is most definitely a Democratic tactic.

Just tell me why MSNBC didn't mention the 2000 Results...when there were no Diebold Machines, when no one locked up the ballot counting...Same results...it's just circumstantial bullshit that catches the insecurities of alarmists and it is hurting this fucking country.

[Nbadan]

No ass, what I am trying to convey to you is that I am fucking proof of the change that took place in this country, because of 911, because of the absolutely despicable left wing tactics used by Michael Moore and the like, because of heavily biased liberal media that is destroying the integrity of the press.

I am a guy who hated Bush in 2000, I voted for the Democratic candidate every year since 1992. It's not that surprising what happened in this country.

Look asshole, there is a threat in the mass media, but it's not the liberal media that is to blame. People can filter through obvious reporter biases, but FoxNews and TalkRadio go well beyond just innocent biases and slant their infotainment, not news, with obvious right-wing slants that go beyond the level of belief. It's really no surprise that listeners of Talkradio and FoxNews watchers are regularly the most misinformed people out there in polls. It shows in this forum. People say they don't listen to talk radio, but they are so misinformed it is hard to believe otherwise.

[whottt]

See cocksucker? Now whos ducking the issue?

Why didn't they mention 2000 had similar results in all of those counties?

Rather than just assuming the worse I went and checked to see if that is really that unusual and guess what I found?

I found the reason I no longer support the Democratic Party...and it's been happening for a while now.

[Nbadan]

found the reason I no longer support the Democratic Party...and it's been happening for a while now.

You found diddly. Where did the extra Bush votes come from in Ohio and Florida?

Nice. Ducking the hard questions again?

[whottt]

Look asshole, there is a threat in the mass media, but it's not the liberal media that is to blame. People can filter through obvious reporter biases, but FoxNews and TalkRadio go well beyond just innocent biases and slant their infotainment, not news, with obvious right-wing slants that go beyond the level of belief. It's really no surprise that listeners of Talkradio and FoxNews watchers are regularly the most misinformed people out there in polls. It shows in this forum. People say they don't listen to talk radio, but they are so misinformed it is hard to believe otherwise.


It's obvious that most of the high profile employees of Fox are Conservatives...

But the point you are missing out on...is that their news anchors there...their people who are supposed to be unbiased, the Network as a whole.....they do a better job of reporting the news accurately. That said, I still watch CNN more than any of them because of:

http://www.niacouncil.org/images/iatc/rudi2.JPG

And I think she's a Republican anyway :)

[Nbadan]

Just tell me why MSNBC didn't mention the 2000 Results...when there were no Diebold Machines, when no one locked up the ballot counting...Same results...it's just circumstantial bullshit that catches the insecurities of alarmists and it is hurting this fucking country.

[hanging chad]Just cause Diebold machines weren't around doesn't mean that fraud didn't also occur in 2000[/hanging chad]

[Nbadan]

I watch Foxnews just for some of the hot female anchors, but their views piss the fuck out of me, and after watching Outfoxed their trickery is so obvious it's more amusing than anything else now.

[whottt]

You found diddly. Where did the extra Bush votes come from in Ohio and Florida?

Nice. Ducking the hard questions again?

From the Repuclicans trolling their base better turnout of course and the Democrats doing the same...I mean I am watching liberals all over their country both laud and criticize the way the Bush campaign handled the Gay Marriage initiatives and tapped into to their benefit.

Do you also believe there are more gay people than straight?

Now you tell me why you think there would be a different turnout in those counties than 2000? Why?


Bush is not as hated as you guys think he is...more people like him now, than liked him before...it's just the facts, you guys were beaten, give it up. Kerry has, Clinton has.

[whottt]

[hanging chad]Just cause Diebold machines weren't around doesn't mean that fraud didn't also occur in 2000[/hanging chad]

Sorry but backing up one unproven conspiracy with another unproven conspiracy only weakens your argument.

Anyone can just make unproven and unfounded accusations of fraud...Republicans can do it as well.


You can just keep throwing conpiracies on top of conspiracies but you aren't going to be viewed as having credibility until you have some kind of hard evidence to back up your claims...you haven't even gotten a starting point yet.

[whottt]

I watch Foxnews just for some of the hot female anchors, but their views piss the fuck out of me, and after watching Outfoxed their trickery is so obvious it's more amusing than anything else now.

Fox has a greater quantity of babes but Rudi is like the most beautiful woman on the entire planet...she trumps Fox for me. I'll watch her when she is on.

Besides, she won my heart after calling a gay priest a gay bitch...I love a woman who runs homosmack.

But now you know how I feel about CNN and CNBC...I literally feel like the life has been sucked out of me after watching a couple of hours...

The Fox guys are obviously conservative but they don't let it get in the way with their jobs...I mean no one fucking thinks Sean Hannity is an objective guy...people did think Dan Rather was objective....that's the difference.

[Nbadan]

You can just keep throwing conpiracies on top of conspiracies but you aren't going to be viewed as having credibility until you have some kind of hard evidence to back up your claims...you haven't even gotten a starting point yet.

What other hard evidence do you need? We have legitimate proof that more voters voted than were legally registered in counties in Florida and Ohio. If Kerry had won, the Senate and House would be calling for an immediate investigation and the right-wing media pundits would be sucking this dryer than Monica sucked Bill. Where is your scream of a right-wing media bias? Or does it only count for you when the obvious bias is liberal?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Warren County did go for Bush in 2000, but it's hard to believe that Reagan-democrats supported W in greater numbers in 2004 than they did in 2000.

Why is it so hard to believe? Even your poster child Bill Clinton said the Republicans did a better job getting out the vote.

I'll put it another way... a friend of mine who worked for one of the campaigns, had friends in both campaigns said the difference in this election was the voter mobilization.

Said the Demos got out and registered a lot of folks, but didn't follow through. His quote, which I have saved to my comp. because it was such a telling one, was that...


the difference this week was that the Kerry campaign had registered voters in the states, but didn't follow through with them, while the Republicans were organized by and in contact with their registered voters down to the city block.

BTW, you never answered whott's original post, about how the same counties went for Bush in 2000. And yet you come on here and scream you're not a conspiracy theorist, when a fellow democrat pointed out the very scientific and plausible explanation citing data from 2000.

Shit, as far right as you think Fox News is, MSNBC is that far to the damn left.

Do me a favor Dan and just shut the fuck up about this vote stuff. Bill Clinton of all people said that demos need to get over the fact they lost and get on with their lives.

But I guess in your case, seeings you don't have one, this is all you have to hang on to. Go get laid (hookers are cheap), pick up knitting, or go cruise Wal-Mart or something, but take a fucking chill pill.

[Nbadan]

From the Repuclicans trolling their base better turnout of course and the Democrats doing the same...I mean I am watching liberals all over their country both laud and criticize the way the Bush campaign handled the Gay Marriage initiatives and tapped into to their benefit.

Do you also believe there are more gay people than straight?

Now you tell me why you think there would be a different turnout in those counties than 2000? Why?

Bush is not as hated as you guys think he is...more people like him now, than liked him before...it's just the facts, you guys were beaten, give it up. Kerry has, Clinton has.

The Bush adminstration and more importantly, the mail-order king, Karl Rove took a wedge issue that the adminstration has no serious intention to back, mostly because it wouldn't survive a Supreme Court challenge because of the obvious discrimination, but also because they plan to use it again in 2008 to drive out their evangelistic base to vote for Jeb/Guliani.

[whottt]

AHF, I wouldn't try to pass me off as a fellow Democrat, I am middle of the road and will vote either way. In the 80's I was pretty much a Republican. Now more issues I am on the left(actually I am on the left of all of them except on War Policy and ways to get out of economic recessions) but the main reason I am a registered Democrat is because it just so happens the Democrats were the better party in the 90's, while IMO, the Republicans were a bunch of extremists...it's kind of changed...

The Republicans are still too far to the right IMO, but not as bad as the Gingrich Buchannan days, they aren't near as good as the Reagan era...and they aren't as far to the right as a party as the Crats are to the left.

I won't even consider voting for another Democratic candidate until I hear one totally denounce what Michael Moore did in Farenheint 911, and not try to use his lies to get elected at the expense of the integrity of the highest office in the land.

[Nbadan]

BTW, you never answered whott's original post, about how the same counties went for Bush in 2000. And yet you come on here and scream you're not a conspiracy theorist, when a fellow democrat pointed out the very scientific and plausible explanation citing data from 2000.

We are talking about 30 counties in Ohio alone that are showing voting discrepencies alone, and who knows how many in Florida. Whott's data covered one county in Florida, and W took more Democrats in 2004 according to the data. Hard to believe given that Democrats who supported W in 2000 were Reagan conservatives of which W is not.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Cool, my bad Whott :)


BTW Dan, I just went back and read the first half of this thread. The voting turnouts over 100% were explained on election night, by CNN no less.

They had some Ohio election officials on, and they commented that voters were allowed to show up and cast provisional ballots on election day, even if they weren't registered voters in that precinct or county (it was a lawsuit that Democratic lawyers won to get these votes and process allowed no less), and that they weren't turning anyone away who showed up to vote.

They even specifically mentioned Cuyahoga county as where this was occurring at the largest rate.

So, try again.

[whottt]

The Bush adminstration and more importantly, the mail-order king, Karl Rove took a wedge issue that the adminstration has no serious intention to back, mostly because it wouldn't survive a Supreme Court challenge because of the obvious discrimination, but also because they plan to use it again in 2008 to drive out their evangelistic base to vote for Jeb/Guliani.

All that's well and good, I call that politics as usual...you want to make those kinds of critcisms go right ahead...I might even agree with you. And to tell you the truth, I kind of hope you are right, I hope Bush and Rove are actually more centrist than they appear to be right now, either way, I still like them better.


But um, Giuliani is pro gay and pro choice...I don't think they are going to see Giulianni as a good person to bring out that evangelical vote, but I don't think that's going to be a huge issue in the next election anyway. I think they are going to see him as person to move more to the Center and clean up on Democratic Votes.

Guiliani will take New York and will take all of middle America...regardless of his stance on abortion or gay rights...Because we know he has balls, and kicks the living shit out of corruption...and that's what matters to most Americans right now...

Giuliani will be the next President of the United States, bank on it. And he's going to be an excellent one...although I wouldn't expect him to be any better of a diplomat than Bush.

If I were the Democratic Party I'd be doing everything in my power to drive a wedge between Giuliani and the Republican Party...I'b be trying to get him to go back to being a Democrat. He's the only way you guys are gonna win the next Presidential election. New York and America will repay him for the guts and heart he showed during 911 by electing him as the next President...regardless of party affiliation.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Whott's data covered one county in Florida, and W took more Democrats in 2004 according to the data.

So what if W. did? Is there some law that says that democrats have to vote democratic? Just because you hate him doesn't mean every other democrat does.

I know several demos here in the state of Texas that crossed party lines to vote for Bush for various reasons (most notably they thought he was a POS for what he did when he got back from Vietnam, as well as his whole global test thing when they found out he voted against going into Kuwait in '91, and the kicker was the gay rights thing).

But it's obvious that seeings they were Demos and voted for Bush, Rove and Bush obviously cheated here in Texas too, right?

Fuck man, it's over. I think your biggest problem is you look at all these figures, and you don't find it possible that people crossed party lines to vote for Bush. There's a lot more people out there who like Bush, despite what you and your kin like Michael Moore think.

And you are right in that the whole gay marriage issue did galvanize the conservative base, as well as a lot of the centrist base, to get out and vote for Bush.

Why that's bullshit in your eyes confuses me, it's like you're convicting people in this country for having some convictions and getting out and voting for them (which you probably wouldn't have been complaining about had their votes gone the way you wanted them to).

People had views that they voted on, you shouldn't curse them just because your boy Kerry was on the wrong end of their votes.

[whottt]

Right, I don't think the Crats realize just how many people didn't like Kerry...

What's great is that he is making noises of running in 2008...and the Democrats are basically telling him to go fuck himself...they said the Democratic Turnout for him had nothing to do with him and every thing to do with trying to get Bush out of office LMAO.

[timvp]

Well yeah, if the votes went to Bush at the same degree in 2000 in those Florida counties ... that pretty much destroys the whole theory.

Way to blow the entertainment value, Whottt. :lol

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Way to blow the entertainment value, Whottt.

:lol

Don't worry, it won't take Dan to come up with some new lunacy.

[whottt]

I see Whottt likes to dodge the tough questions rather than face them straight up.

Tom Cruise: What is your name all about I WANT THE TRUTH!!!

Don't remember what I was thinking when I made this name...but basically I wanted to argue with a troll at the old WOAI board and I was trying to come up with an obnoxious name...

And thanks TimVP :), I'm telling you man...the media has no shame these days. You have to check out just about anything they say. And that's one conspiracy you can believe.

[Nbadan]

They had some Ohio election officials on, and they commented that voters were allowed to show up and cast provisional ballots on election day, even if they weren't registered voters in that precinct or county (it was a lawsuit that Democratic lawyers won to get these votes and process allowed no less), and that they weren't turning anyone away who showed up to vote.

They even specifically mentioned Cuyahoga county as where this was occurring at the largest rate.

So, try again.

Still doesn't explain why there were more votes in Florida and Ohio than registered voters. Try again.

Here is a great article from a objective conservative who isn't burying his head in the sand over the obvious voter fraud issue...


We've Been Had

by Edgar J. Steele
November 8, 2004

"It's amazing I won. I was running against peace, prosperity and incumbency."
--George W. Bush, June 14, 2001, speaking to Swedish Prime Minister Goran Perrson, unaware that a live television camera was still rolling

"You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays, everybody's crazy."
-- Charles Manson, serial killer and one-time cult leader

I'm glad that Kerry lost. However, I am horrified that Bush won. Or did he?

We get the government we deserve, it is said. What, exactly, did I do to deserve this? And I'm a conservative, too. Imagine how the liberals must feel.

For every person I know who voted for Bush, I know four who voted for Kerry or a third-party candidate, not to mention another six who didn't vote at all! But, then, I run in some unusual circles. Even so...

The Zogby Polls, which usually are pretty accurate, had Kerry winning a clear majority, not just a plurality, and sweeping the Electoral College. Exit polls, which are even more accurate, had Kerry winning going away, especially in the key "Battleground States" of Ohio and Florida, both of which inexplicably ended up in Bush's column at the end. I noticed that, for once, none of the network anchors really discussed either type of poll, though CNN has been accused of jiggering its report of exit poll results. In an excuse switch reminiscent of Iraq being blamed for possessing weapons of mass destruction, suddenly the blame for the voting-booth conversion to Bush is being placed upon the desire of the common man to stamp out homosexual marriage. As comedienne Judy Tenuta likes to say: "It could happen!" Yeah...right.

Dick Morris, ex Clinton political consultant, wrote an article for The Hill, read by a great many Washington insiders, in which he said, "This was no mere mistake. Exit polls cannot be as wrong across the board as they were on election night."

Yes, I called for Bush's ouster well over a year ago (IMPEACH BUSH NOW and Bush Must Go!), but I'm still pretty much a conservative. Aside from the lunatic-fringe Christian fundamentalist/dispensationalists, many conservatives started talking about Bush that way at about the same time. That's just paleoconservatives, however; we who predate neoconservatives, those who are but old liberal whine in new battles. That's why you should listen to my ilk more closely than the liberals who just upped their intake of Prozac, alcohol and a variety of other reality-altering substances. They would be railing against anything Republican or conservative just now. People like myself are a different matter altogether. And there are a lot of us. Which is why Bush's victory quite simply does not pass the smell test.

It seems clear to me that Bush didn't win fairly. I think Kerry actually won the election and allowed Bush to steal it. In retrospect, it appears to me that Al Gore did the same thing, albeit less abjectly than did Kerry. But, this time Bush got caught with his hand in the ballot box. I've just had a heel-of-the-hand-forehead-thumping "aha" experience. How could I, of all people, have missed something so obvious?

Yes, I have noted rampant vote fraud in the past and expected it this time, as well. I have witnessed it first hand at the local level. I have read many credible reports from others at all levels, concerning past vote fraud. Yet, I did not believe it was so blatant...so massive as what obviously just occurred. How could I possibly expect others to see it now if I didn't see it coming? How could I be so...dumb?

Now comes the hard part: How do we make clear that free elections in America were a thing of the past as long as four years ago?

It's a good thing that Kerry won't be in the Oval Office; but, another four years like we just had? America won't make it. On the other hand, that could turn out to be the good news, I suppose, for survivors of what America is about to become.

Bad as Kerry would have been, he would have been gridlocked by the Republican Congress. None of that for Bush, though, who has presided over the biggest runup in deficits and most criminal war that America has ever seen. Kerry could never have obtained the blank check for war that Congress handed to Bush - and will again. Expect the upcoming mid-term election in 2002 to produce more of the same miraculous Republican victories and give Bush the 60-Republican Senate edge that he needs to advance any legislation without danger of Democrat filibuster.

The smell left over from Election Day is bad enough, all by itself, but there is evidence, lots of evidence, of vote fraud on a scale not seen since the heydays of Communist Russia. Next we will see ballots with only one name appearing in each slot (given our "choice" of candidates, we essentially got there years ago, however).

How on earth did despicable Democrat Tom Daschle get beaten? Mind you, the only Senators I would be more pleased to see go are Hillary, Feinstein and the execrable Charles Schumer, but it seems extremely unlikely that Daschle's constituents would have voted him out of office in a fair election. Is it just coincidence that Daschle has been a particularly nettlesome thorn in George W. Bush's side for the past four years?

The problems in Ohio on election day are starkly outlined by attorney Ray Beckerman in his Basic Report from Columbus: "Touch screen voting machines in Youngstown OH were registering "George W. Bush" when people pressed "John F. Kerry" ALL DAY LONG." One precinct in suburban Columbus reported that nearly 4,000 votes were "accidentally" credited to Bush. Mr. Beckerman also reports that lines in predominantly-Democratic precincts were 5-10 hours in length, versus near nonexistent in Republican strongholds, for the simple reason that precincts expected to line up in the Republican column had five times as many voting machines as others. Beckerman outlines a number of other irregularities in one of this election's two key "battleground" states, the one that gave the election to Bush, just as Florida did four years ago with a healthy assist from the US Supreme Court. Is all of this simply coincidental in an election where the disputed votes decided the outcome?

The other key battleground state, Florida, reported similar problems: "(S)everal dozen voters in six states - particularly Democrats in Florida - who said the wrong candidates appeared on their touch-screen machine's checkout screen...In many cases, voters said they intended to select John Kerry but when the computer asked them to verify the choice it showed them instead opting for President Bush..." (Globe and Mail, 11/3/04). More coincidence?

But, the machines don't have to be obviously in error to be rigged. Ronnie Dugger, in How They Could Steal the Election This Time, several months ago described the November 2004 election machinery: "36 million (votes) will be tabulated completely inside the new paperless, direct-recording-electronic (DRE) voting systems, on which you vote directly on a touch-screen...you get no paper record of your vote...you never know, despite what the touch-screen says, whether the computer is counting your vote as you think you are casting it or, either by error or fraud, it is giving it to another candidate. No one can tell what a computer does inside itself by looking at it; an election official 'can't watch the bits inside,' says Dr. Peter Neumann, the principal scientist at the Computer Science Laboratory of SRI International and a world authority on computer-based risks...The four major election corporations count votes with voting-system source codes (which) are kept strictly secret..."

Even if they aren't obviously in error or secretly rigged, these new machines can still have their tabulations changed, with nobody the wiser. One of my favorite Internet columnists, Devvy Kidd, two weeks ago predicted "monstrous problems that will make Florida 2000 pale in comparison." Quoting from the December 1996 issue of Cincinnatus News Service, a vote fraud newsletter, Devvy went on to note, "The missing link in the vote fraud investigation has been found. The November 1996 issue of Relevance Magazine reveals that two-way hidden modems are being built into the ever growing number of computerized optical scanner/direct recording voting machines in use all across the country from New England to California...these hidden modems are accessible by remote cell phone technology...these voting machines can be accessed and manipulated from a central super computer without a phone line connected to the wall, and without the local precinct workers knowing that anything is happening at all." I wonder why Dan Rather didn't tell us about this?

Just look at all the "user login" notations in this rare audit log from Washington State's King County, where a number of voting tabulation irregularities are now under investigation. No notation is made, of course, of what those anonymous users did, once logged into the database. Go here for an interesting report and speculation about how and by whom the voting machines are being hacked - particularly, note the Republican connection through an attorney.

Diebold, Inc., is one of the country's biggest suppliers of paperless, touch-screen voting machines. Diebold's CEO, Walter O'Dell, wrote a letter four months ago soliciting major-league campaign contributions for Bush, in which he said, "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." Diebold is based in Canton, Ohio. Coincidence?

Convinced yet? I am.

This year apparently wasn't the first to see this new technology exploited, either. In "The Stolen Election of 2004: Welcome Back to Hell," Larry Chin reports on touch-screen "black-box" voting: "The technology had a trial run in the 2002 mid-term elections. In Georgia, serviced by new Diebold systems, a popular Democratic governor and senator were both unseated in what the media called 'amazing' upsets, with results showing vote swings of up to 16 percent from the last pre-ballot polls. In computerized Minnesota, former Vice President Walter Mondale - a replacement for popular incumbent Paul Wellstone, who died in a plane crash days before the vote - was also defeated in a large last-second vote swing. Convenient 'glitches' in Florida saw an untold number of votes intended for the Democratic candidate registering instead for Governor Jeb 'L'il Brother' Bush." More coincidence, do you suppose?

Now pay particularly close attention to the very next sentence from Mr. Chin's article: "A Florida Democrat who lost a similarly 'glitched' local election went to court to have the computers examined - but the case was thrown out by a judge who ruled that the innards of America's voting machines are the 'trade secrets' of the private companies who make them." So, the legal system steps in and removes any chance of our being able to audit what these things do. Coincidence?

And it's not just the touch-screen voting machines that are susceptible. CommonDreams.org's Thom Hartmann notes that "(I)n Florida's smaller counties the results from the optically scanned paper ballots - fed into a central tabulator PC and thus vulnerable to hacking - seem to have been reversed" (Evidence Mounts that the Vote was Hacked, Rense.com). Mr. Hartman's analysis shows that Florida would have gone to Kerry, had those small-county anomalies been more consistent with actual party affiliation registration by voters. Do you believe in coincidence? Did all those rural Floridian Democrats really vote for Bush, do you suppose? Florida, alone, would have changed the outcome of the election.

Also in Florida, the other key "battleground" state that was widely expected to go Kerry, the official election results of Palm Beach's (of 2000's "butterfly ballot" fame) disclosed that, while 454,427 people voted, 542,835 votes were tallied, a discrepancy of 88,000 votes. Shortly after this oddity was picked up and reported by The Washington Dispatch, officials inexplicably "found" over 91,000 additional absentee ballots which had, somehow, already been counted, thus balancing its own tally. More coincidence, I suppose.

Americans seem to believe that the world thinks as we do; that, somehow, Bush is viewed favorably. He is not, as vividly demonstrated by England's Danny Dayus in his article, Don't Be American: "According to recent opinion polls, a majority of people in the USA actually believe that most of the world favoured the re-election of George W Bush as president - this despite several surveys that suggest that support for Kerry over Bush in the wider world was something between a 2:1 and 10:1 ratio."

At left: George W. Bush in an increasingly typical pose. Talk about character. Can you imagine George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy or, even, Richard Nixon ever doing this publicly? Why is this man's obvious mental imbalance, intemperance and lack of propriety not apparent to every American? This is precisely the image of America now held by the rest of the world.

This election was a foregone conclusion, as some noted beforehand. Greg Palast, Harper's editor who investigated American vote fraud on behalf of the British Broadcasting System, reported on November 1 that upwards of one million votes, expected to be cast overwhelmingly for Kerry, would not be counted "(B)ecause, in important states like Ohio, Florida and New Mexico, voter names have been systematically removed from the rolls and absentee ballots have been overlooked—overwhelmingly in minority areas..." More coincidence, of course.

Houston, we have a problem. Many have taken me to task recently for advocating voting - just not voting for Democrats or Republicans - rather than pointedly not voting. In view of the massive and unprecedented vote fraud that now is apparent, my attitude concerning this is undergoing revision...and I'm leaning toward not voting. Of course, I'm having some other leanings, too - leanings that might get me put in jail, were I to share them with you.

Look - the people apparently disenfranchised this time around primarily are those with whom I generally disagree, but it is the fundamental unfairness of what has taken place that most offends me, not to mention the path down which America now treads. If I really believed this election showed the true color of conservatism, I would join the liberals in a heartbeat and replace my "Nuke the Whales" bumper sticker with one that says "Save the Baby Seals."

If this is what it means to be conservative today, I want to be liberal.

New America. An idea whose time has come.

Bayou Buzz (http://www.bayoubuzz.com/boards/philboard_read.asp?id=833)

[whottt]

Prove that the Republicans were behind all those extra registrations...the Democrats were caught multiple times registering fraudulent voters, and many of these complaints about more registered people than actually live in the counties... were first announced by the Republicans prior to the elections, and they were complaining about it being done in Ohio...Remember?

Think about it...or do some research...the Republicans were the ones complaining about the extra ballots originally...

The Democrats were the ones wanting no id check, no election challengers...Registering homesless guys and Mary Poppins, trying to get out the convict vote.... Remember?

[CrazyOne]

Whott... I'm ashamed of you.. you sound like you want to disenfranchise the source of so many votes for the Democrats up north... dead people and fictional characters. :lol

[Nbadan]

The Republicans have gone from using dead voters to using ghost voters. The numbers don't lie and they don't add up in either Ohio or Florida. Plus, we have the multiple machine malfunctions, one even in SA, that counted Kerry votes for Bush for most of the day before someone finally noticed. The much longer lines at swing-state democratic voting stations (2-9 hours) compared to (30-45 minutes). The Homeland Department using a terrorist alert to seal off the press from the official count in Warren County, and then W winning with the counties margin of victory.

This whole election reeks.

[CrazyOne]

It only reeks when you can't stand the smell of victory by and for and of the people.

[gophergeorge]

To Whott and Dan,

Thanks for making my day.... "What did Crash say?" "Must have called him a cocksucker"

[Spurminator]

The best thing for the Bush Administration to do is to allow an independent investigation immediately and put this thing to bed.

[CrazyOne]

George, great to see you here... as you can tell, the level of lunacy has gone up dramatically lately... of course, not everyone considers lunacy a bad thing... :spin

[Hook Dem]

To Whott and Dan,

Thanks for making my day.... "What did Crash say?" "Must have called him a cocksucker"
And we hope you are having a good day GG. You are not forgotten and we are truly indebted to your efforts. God Bless You Man!

[Uncle Donnie]

I hope Olbermann realizes how potentially harmful this is. He better have some serious proof of wrongdoing. For now I won't take it for any more than the wishful thinking of a left wing Bill O'Reilly wanna-be.

Oh, and MSNBC is just as bad if not worse than Fox in their political biases. Visit their web site. They work closely with Newsweek, that pretty much says it all.

In fact I daily visit both foxnews.com and msnbc.com just to try to get a balanced news report between the two.

[samikeyp]

I am middle of the road and will vote either way. In the 80's I was pretty much a Republican. Now more issues I am on the left(actually I am on the left of all of them except on War Policy and ways to get out of economic recessions) but the main reason I am a registered Democrat is because it just so happens the Democrats were the better party in the 90's, while IMO, the Republicans were a bunch of extremists...it's kind of changed...

The Republicans are still too far to the right IMO, but not as bad as the Gingrich Buchannan days, they aren't near as good as the Reagan era...and they aren't as far to the right as a party as the Crats are to the left.

I won't even consider voting for another Democratic candidate until I hear one totally denounce what Michael Moore did in Farenheint 911, and not try to use his lies to get elected at the expense of the integrity of the highest office in the land.

Uh oh...something else whottt and I agree on! yikes! :)

although I am not registered with either party. I vote for whom I think is the best candidate. While I have not agreed with everything the President has done...John Kerry did not give me any reason to change my mind.

[Nbadan]

The best thing for the Bush Administration to do is to allow an independent investigation immediately and put this thing to bed.

That's the last thing the administration wants. It's much easier to just continue the charade, call those who know the facts conspiracy theorists, and try to get the public thinking about something else because we all know that the public is dumb and has the attention span of a kid with ADD.

I'm telling you, this is gonna blow up in their faces, but it's not like they haven't been preparing for this for years. We no longer live in a true democracy, that ended in 2000.

[samikeyp]

Whott... I'm ashamed of you.. you sound like you want to disenfranchise the source of so many votes for the Democrats up north... dead people and fictional characters.

I am glad Texas Democrats never do that.

Sincerely,
LBJ :lol

[Nbadan]

I hope Olbermann realizes how potentially harmful this is. He better have some serious proof of wrongdoing. For now I won't take it for any more than the wishful thinking of a left wing Bill O'Reilly wanna-be.

Don't blame Olbermann. Blame all the corporate owned right-wing media that refuses to do their job, along with the Senate who refuses to investigate these allegations. They are the ones who have conspired together against the will of the people.

[samikeyp]

The best thing for the Bush Administration to do is to allow an independent investigation immediately and put this thing to bed.

agreed.

[Duff McCartney]

Too bad Olbermann didn't stick to sports.

I still remember the big ass snuff he made when he bailed on ESPN and went to Fox Sports...too bad he sucked ass at Fox Sports.

[Yonivore]

The best thing for the Bush administration to do is just ignore the Sore Losermans...

[Marcus Bryant]

ESPN lost the right one.