come blogging

voting rights in germany before US

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:36:33 EDT

from bbv.org;

Usually fighting for public rights and observable elections is just like running on a hamster wheel -- constant battles about uncertified, defective voting machines, hiding freedom of information documents, and quibble, quibble, quibble about hand counts, spot checks, digital signatures, cryptography, certifications, testing...but Germany just took a big short cut and got off the hamster wheel altogether! We can learn a lot from what Germany just did.

What's important is WHY Germany banned computerized voting. Newspapers gave the impression that Germany banned e-voting due to "security issues" or bugs. NOT SO: The ban was based on HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. This stopped e-voting dead in Germany. No more hamster wheel.

This decision represents spectacular progress for the US voting rights groups who believe computerized, secret vote counting violates inalienable rights. Germany gave us effective argumentation for this. It starts with reframing the issue of computerized voting into basic human rights.

The details of Germany's knock-out punch arguments are below. If you feel uncomfortable about computerized voting, the controversial Help America Vote Act (HAVA), and the new 2009 Holt Bill that expands on HAVA, here's real hope for change.

For years now, leaders like voting rights lawyer Paul Lehto, Nancy Tobi (Democracy for New Hampshire/Election Defense Alliance), and Bev Harris of Black Box Voting, and have been focusing on these issues from the standpoint of human rights. We believe that counting votes on computers controlled by insiders violates inalienable rights, specifically the right to public scrutiny of public elections.

Germany agrees.

Last week, Germany's Supreme Court equivalent, its federal constitutional court, issued a decision that computerized vote counting is unconstitutional.

HEY, AMERICA IS NOT GERMANY

But the principles in the German decision are very much in line with the principles underlying our own democratic structure.

As Paul Lehto explains, "We [the USA] insisted on the human rights provisions as a condition of approval of the post-war German Constitution. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights came out in December 1948, and the German Constitution was signed off by Allies and went into effect May 23, 1949. We insisted on human rights, including free, genuine public elections, for post-war Germany. We conditioned our approval specifically on these human rights being 'inviolable and inalienable.' Meaning, they can't be violated and they can't be lost, waived or forfeited."

WHAT WOULD GERMANY DO ABOUT COMPUTERIZED VOTING MACHINES?

Last week's decision by Germany's high court ultimately prohibits voting machines from further use. Reasoning behind the decision is as follows -- I've broken it up into bite-sized chunks, scroll, skim, and re-read the parts that resonate with you:

----------------------
German decision: "The use of voting machines which electronically record the voters’ votes and electronically ascertain the election result only meets the constitutional requirements if the essential steps of the voting and of the ascertainment of the result can be examined reliably and without any specialist knowledge of the subject. "
----------------------

It goes on to state that such examination must be available to the public; in fact it says "A complementary examination by the voter, by the electoral bodies or the general public";

----------------------
"The use of electronic voting machines requires that the essential steps of the voting and of the determination of the result [the count] can be examined by the citizen reliably and without any specialist knowledge of the subject. This requirement results from the principle of the public nature of elections"
----------------------

WHAT WOULD GERMANY DO ABOUT THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT and THE HOLT "VOTER CONFIDENCE" BILL (WHICH EXPANDS ON HAVA)?

Germany had its own version of something similar to HAVA. This court decision declares that legislation to be unconstitutional.

----------------------
"The Federal Voting Machines Ordinance is unconstitutional because it infringes on the principle of the public nature of elections.

"The Federal Voting Machines Ordinance (Bundeswahlgeräteverordnung) is unconstitutional because it does not ensure that only such voting machines are permitted and used which meet the constitutional requirements of the principle of the public nature of elections. "
----------------------

In various parts of the decision, it makes it clear that the right to public scrutiny cannot be removed in order to make sure voters don't make a mistake on their ballot, cannot be removed for speedy results, cannot be removed and replaced with something else that does not involve the citizens themselves.

WHAT WOULD GERMANY SAY ABOUT CERTIFICATION AND TESTING OF VOTING MACHINES?

The USA has a decades-long history of inept and corrupt certification and testing processes. Just last week, the EAC admitted that it doesn't understand its own technical reports (leading us to wonder how "the public" is supposed to make sense of any of this.)

Here's what the German decision says about certification and testing:

----------------------
"Limitations of the possibility for the citizens to examine the voting cannot be compensated by an official institution testing sample machines in the context of their engineering type licensing procedure, or the very voting machines which will be used in the elections before their being used, for their compliance with specific security requirements and for their technical integrity."
----------------------

WHAT DOES GERMANY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT TRYING MITIGATING SECRET VOTE-COUNTING WITH AUDITS AND OTHER PROCEDURES?

What Americans have been calling an "audit" is mislabeled, because measures called election audits are actually spot checks, and missing the management report component of real audits; no effort is made to evaluate chain of custody as part of the spot check. But the German court decision correctly pointed out that Government substitution of public scrutiny with its own check is no substitute at all.

----------------------
"Also an extensive entirety of other technical and organizational security measures alone is not suited to compensate a lack of the possibility of the essential steps of the electoral procedure being examined by the citizens."
----------------------

The German decision should bring encouragement to Americans who just knew something was wrong. A whole nation agrees with you! Now, to get our own country to protect and defend our own rights. We all need to help, by clearly stating what we really want: public scrutiny of all phases of public elections.

* * *

(1) 2009 version of Holt "Voter Confidence" bill:
http://www.bbvdocs.org/2009holt.pdf

(2) Official English translation of the government statement on the German decision:
http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/en/press/bvg09-019en.html

(3) German version: http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/pressemitteilungen/bvg09-019.html

Permission to reprint granted, with link to http://www.blackboxvoting.org

This message was sent by: Black Box Voting, Inc., 330 SW 43rd St Suite K - PMB 547, Renton, WA 98057

EFCA; the right thing for US middle class!!

Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:52:44 EST

we must get behind labor and educate others about EFCA!!! do it now and tell the corporations that are lobbying against us where to go!!!

How do we know? What can we DO??

Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:21:47 EST

“An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or other (electronic) communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. Aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle (one)makes some people lose their minds.”

Yes folks, I’m talking about those who live under the bridge and desire that we follow them there.

“I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.

Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.

For trolls, any response is 'recognition'; they are unable to distinguish between irritation and admiration; their ego grows directly in proportion to the response, regardless of the form or content of that response.

Trolls, rather surprisingly, dispute this, claiming that it's a game or joke; this merely confirms the diagnosis; how sad do you have to be to find such mind-numbingly trivial timewasting to be funny?

Remember that trolls are cowards; they'll usually post just enough to get an argument going, then sit back and count the responses (Yes, that's what they do!).” http://www.flayme.com/troll/#How

How can you tell if a post is from one of these friendly folks? You can’t easily, especially with these professional ones, and those who pretend to be ‘insiders.’ It doesn’t matter as long as you don’t reward them anyway!

“There is no better way to shift a troll from a newsgroup than simply to ignore it. Sometimes, that is not possible; perhaps it has succeeeded in upsetting people.

It can be tempting to play games with the troll, they are easy to wind up, and watching them in contortions of fury feels like justice. But think before you do this - not out of mercy to the slug - but because it is boring at best for your fellow members, and irritating at worst; you may be labeled a troll yourself. Best to ignore.” http://www.flayme.com/troll/#How

Here are the five types identified loosely;

Spamming troll: Posts to many newsgroups with the same verbatim post.

Kooks: A regular member of a forum who habitually drops comments that have no basis on the topic or even in reality.

Flamer: Does not contribute to the group except by making inflammatory comments.

Hit-and-runner: Stops in, make one or two posts and move on.

Psycho trolls: Has a psychological need to feel good by making others feel bad.

"A group is considered to be cohesively destroyed when two-thirds to three-quarters of the messages are a result of [trolls'] comments," Wood explains. They often target new users, who are more likely to take offense” or take their side. http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;1173450669;pp;2

So remember Lace’s Mantra??? ReportIgnoreDonate really IS the best way to deal with trolls. If you let them ‘trigger’ or ‘take over’ the discussion, then no one wins. Remember, HQ is in charge of deciding what posts to remove, often remove posts with or without their being reported, and ALWAYS have the final say about things; IT’S NOT OUR BLOG. Let’s get back to why we were invited here in the first place!!

Joe's Birthday

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:05:26 EST

it's Joe Ruwe's Birthday TODAY, and since we all love Joe Ruwe, if we all hum Happy Birthday i'm sure he'll hear us and come to the blog!!!

(gets out the pitch pipe) ready???

(blows in pipe) Happy Birthday to YOUUUUUU.....

love ya Joe Ruwe!!

blackboxvoting.org

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:51:52 EDT

another update from BBV.org, (rather late, i've been working for the O); read it here!

USA - Diebold/Premier says it's too late to fix a new voting machine 2-minute warning and "time-out" feature, which can kick voters off the machine, forcing them to accept a provisional ballot. At least 15 voters were booted off the machine in Johnson County, Kansas recently, and Diebold/Premier says this is due to a software upgrade which sets a timer on voter inactivity. According to the company, the machines receiving the upgrade are used in 34 states and 1,700 jurisdictions.*

*This seems inflated, though. Unless the optical scan machines are also outfitted with a 2-minute warning, which doesn't make sense, it would seem that this should only apply to the DRE states and locations.

JOINING THIS PROBLEM TO MAKE IT BIGGER:

A study on DRE allocation from Ohio indicates that it takes an average of four to nine minutes per voter to cast an average-length ballot, and ballots in many locations will be longer than average this fall. Each additional ballot question can add 30 seconds to the time a voter must monopolize the DRE.

Diebold's 2-minute timeout kicks in when the voter does not make a selection quickly enough. (Welcome to 21st Century literacy tests.)

According to a Sept. 10 Kansas City Star Article, Johnson County upgraded touchscreen voting machines with a new software release from Diebold subsidiary Premier Election Solutions Inc. Buried in the release notes was a mention of a new "time out" feature that makes the voting machine eject a voter card if there has been no activity for 150 seconds. The machine emits a warning sound at 120 seconds.

You can read the full article here:
http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/14307

this one's late...

Tue, 02 Sep 2008 06:46:00 EDT

3 new videos & an UPDATE ON OUR BALLOT RIGGING EXPERIMENT (below the video info)

ELECTION REALITY TV - "THE JEANNIE DEAN VIDEO" -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwovSqXWKQ8
Police dogs assigned, ballots in the dark, and the State of New Hampshire denies having any information about the K-9 Unit assignment. Officials changed their mind when this video hit YouTube, now say they are "looking for the records." Sarasota citizen Jeannie Dean provides graphic evidence about the state of your democracy right now. And if you still believe citizen sovereignty is intact, Google "Thomas Jefferson" and see if you still believe this is what the founders meant to create.

ELECTION REALITY TV - "9 MINUTES ON THE ROAD WITH BUTCH & HOPPY"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=710FyJkflDA
A dizzying trip following the New Hampshire ballot pickup van as "Butch & Hoppy" collected ballots for the 2008 recount of the presidential primary -- you decide: Evasive manuevers or can't find a map?

ELECTION REALITY TV - "FACE TO FACE WITH THE RECOUNT GUYS"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrdzXp3Zbmk
Bullitt County, Kentucky citizen Kathy Greenwell confronts the New Hampshire Secretary of State face to face; New Hampshire hires an investigator - he interrogates the citizens instead of investigating multiple violations of election law; and "Hoppy" speaks his mind.

* * * * *

Birth Control is a form of Abortion??? Since when???

Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:42:14 EDT

This just in from my friends at Planned Parenthood of Iowa, thought I'd encourage you all to check and see what YOUR governor is doing about it!!

Dear Mary,

Gov. Culver joins the opposition to this rule click here to read

Birth control = Abortion? If a new rule proposed by the Bush Administration is enacted that would become U.S. policy.

A proposed rule which sidesteps the legislative process is currently in the works at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This rule would redefine birth control as abortion! It would also make it easier for doctors and pharmacists to refuse to provide contraceptives.

Iowa Planned Parenthood Affiliate League (IPPAL) knows this is a vital public health issue and has created multiple actions you can take right now to fight this new measure.

Birth Control is NOT Abortion Action Center

Send an e-mail to President Bush telling him why this new rule is a bad idea.
Click here to send Pres. Bush an e-mail

The major news media in Iowa have not picked up this story yet!
Click here to write a letter to the editor in opposition to this new rule.

Gov. Culver recently opposed this new measure.
Click here to send Gov. Culver a thank-you letter

Your help is essential to blocking this new rule change. Changing the definition of birth control and making it abortion will severely impact family planning services in Iowa, and across the nation.

Blocking access to family planning services for millions of women and families is just wrong. Do your part today and take action!

how can we tell? what do we do about them?

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:02:05 EDT

Yes folks, I’m talking about those who live under the bridge and desire that we follow them there.

“I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.

Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.

Nuclear Power Plants--REALLY????

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:51:22 EDT

here is the full text of the latest email from Greg Palast.

The McCain Plan: Homer Simpson without the Donut By Greg Palast

[Thursday, August 7, 2008. North Shore, Long Island]

I’m guessing it was excessive exposure to either radiation or George Bush, but Senator John McCain’s comments from inside a nuclear power plant in Michigan are so cracked-brained that I fear some loose gamma rays are doing to McCain’s gray matter what they did to Homer Simpson’s.

On Tuesday, the presumptive Republican candidate descended into the colon of a nuke to declare we need to build 45 new nuclear plants - that this is the way out of our energy crisis. Nuclear power, declared the senator, is a “safe, efficient [and] inexpensive” alternative to oil.

Really? We can argue all day about whether nuclear plants are safe (they aren’t –period). But there can be no argument whatsoever that these giant radioactive tea-kettles are breathtakingly expensive.

Tax plans

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:38:00 EDT

here is a synopsis of the tax plans as retrieved from the American Tax Policy Institute.

drat, it doesn't work quite right, but here is the WHOLE tax plan, as it's supposed to be! anyone who knows how to post a .doc, please let me know or i'll send it to you and you can post it. i printed it off for family yesterday. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf

Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.

MCCAIN

OBAMA

Income

Avg. tax bill

Over $2.9M

-$269,364

+$701,885

$603K and up

-$45,361

+$115,974

$227K-$603K

-$7,871

+$12

$161K-$227K

-$4,380

-$2,789

$112K-$161K

-$2,614

-$2,204

$66K-$112K

-$1,009

-$1,290

$38K-$66K

-$319

-$1,042

$19K-$38K

-$113

-$892

Under $19K

-$19

-$567

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411693

John McCain and Barack Obama have starkly different philosophies about tax policy - how to raise the revenue needed to support government programs, spur growth and ensure economic fairness.

But voters really want to know one thing: How would the presidential candidates' views trickle down to their tax bills? A report released Wednesday by a nonpartisan policy group in Washington, D.C., takes a big first step toward answering that question.

According to the Tax Policy Center's findings, the common assumptions most people make about the plans of McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, and Obama, the Democrats' pick, are not wildly off-base.

McCain: The average taxpayer in every income group would see a lower tax bill, but high-income taxpayers would benefit more than everyone else.

Obama: High-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else's tax bill would be reduced. Those who benefit the most - in terms of reducing their taxes as a percentage of after-tax income - are in the lowest income groups.

Greg Palast says Barack needs to start sweating....

Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:13:23 EDT

Obama Doesn't Sweat. He should. just got this email from Greg Palast. He's the one that wrote that "little yellow book" the young man was tasared for talking about at the Kerry rally. He's the one who REALLY broke the story about fly-boy bush' history (or lack thereof) in the military. I have a couple of his DVDs and a couple of his books. This is serious business; take a read (i kept the email intact, but wanted to warn those in the states that are cited as well as all the rest of us!!) YOUR VOTE IS AT RISK!!!
by Greg Palast In swing-state Colorado, the Republican Secretary of State conducted the biggest purge of voters in history, dumping a fifth of all registrations. Guess their color. In swing-state Florida, the state is refusing to accept about 85,000 new registrations from voter drives - overwhelming Black voters. In swing state New Mexico, HALF of the Democrats of Mora, a dirt poor and overwhelmingly Hispanic county, found their registrations disappeared this year, courtesy of a Republican voting contractor. In swing states Ohio and Nevada, new federal law is knocking out tens of thousands of voters who lost their homes to foreclosure.

tool kit 2008

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:41:14 EDT

from Blackbox voting (seriously, if you aren 't signed up, go there and get that way!!!)

Permission to reprint, excerpt, and distribute granted. Complete, Concise Tool Kit booklet: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.pdf

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Top 5 things you can do

1. Get involved………pg 5-8
2. Hook up with experienced groups………pg 9
Freedom of Information Tips………pg 10-11
3. Protect & defend – deceptive practices………pg 12-24
4. Protect & defend – voter lists………pg 25-37
5. VOTING MACHINES:
Protect & defend – vote counts………pg 38-71

(cont...)

abortion info??

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:07:59 EDT

http://www.thereitis.org/displayarticle804.html

this article is from a Kerry supporter who talks about abortion and the reality that other countries areactually having LEGAL abortions also have a LOWER abortion rates....go figger!

http://www.thereitis.org/displayarticle785.html

this one is by a STAUNCH CONSERVATIVE who talks about how abortion rates rise under a Reblican administration; and this man's wife would have, had anyone been a candidate for it, been a perfect candidate for an abortion.

I printed these off and shared them at caucuses. I also share them with all Catholics who have conflicts.

please also see my other blog about the verbiage about abortions, i thikn it's called "it will come up." i wrote it in the primaries.

How do we know? What can we DO??

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:26:20 EDT

Yes folks, I’m talking about those who live under the bridge and desire that we follow them there.

“I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.

Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.

First They Came

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:48:11 EDT

some have wondered about the poem on standing up for those who we believe are being dealt an injustice, and i was discussing it with my coworker who remembered enough of it i could find it....

here it is along with the wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Public Financing; Which Candidate Won't Follow the Rules Again???

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:08:49 EDT

the following is taken directly from a newsletter by FAIR; Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting; a watchdog group of the 'watchdog group' called the mainstream media; or better known as the CORPORATE media.

Democratic candidate Barack Obama's June 19 announcement that he would not accept public financing in the presidential race prompted a media furor. Obama's "flip-flop" (Hardball, 6/20/08; USA Today, 6/25/08) was used by many corporate journalists as an opportunity to undermine Obama's reformist image.

"Obama's money move lifts expediency over principle," a USA Today (6/20/08) headline declared. The Associated Press's Liz Sidoti (6/19/08), in an article headlined "Barack Obama Chose Winning Over His Word," wrote that "the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician - one who means what he says and says what he means - while undercutting his call for a new kind of politics."

"It was a flip flop of epic proportions," proclaimed Mark Shields on PBS' Newshour (6/20/08). Scott Simon, host of NPR's Weekend Edition Saturday, charged (6/21/08): "Senator Obama's reversal raises fair questions about the sincerity of his campaign promises and even about the decency of spending so much money…at a time when thousands of Americans are losing their homes and the price of food is becoming difficult to afford." David Broder reiterated this sentiment, affirming (Washington Post, 6/26/08) that Obama "was rightly criticized for rigging the system in his favor."

Despite the media outrage over his "broken promise" (Washington Post, 6/20/08), Obama's stance on public financing has actually been much more qualified; he pledged in a 2007 questionnaire only to "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election" (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2/18/08). Similarly, Obama stated at a February news conference (New York Times, 2/15/08): "If I am the nominee, I will make sure our people talk to John McCain's people to find out if we are willing to abide by the same rules and regulations with respect to the general election going forward."

As recently as April, Obama told Fox News that (4/27/08):

I have promised that I will sit down with John McCain and talk about can we preserve a public system as long as we are taking into account third-party independent expenditures, because what I don't intend to do ... is to allow huge amounts of money to be spent by the RNC, the Republican National Committee, or by organizations like the Swift Boat organization and just stand there.

Media have long gotten Obama's position on public financing wrong. "Obama has pledged to take public financing for the general election if he is the Democratic nominee and his Republican opponent will do the same," the Washington Post reported last year (8/22/07). Similar misapprehensions were expressed in the Toronto Star (3/4/07), New York Times (4/5/07), Orlando Sentinel (4/10/07) and Philadelphia Inquirer (4/17/07), among others.

Obama justified his decision in a video posted on his website, expressing concern about a system which "as it exists today is broken" and "opponents who have become masters at gaming this broken system." In particular, he referred to his belief that during the presidential race, John McCain will benefit from 527s - independent organizations that run negative ad campaigns, such as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who launched a smear campaign against Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004. It was a justification most mainstream media dismissed. A Washington Post (6/20/08) editorial (which did recognize that Obama's "earlier pledge" was "to 'aggressively pursue' an agreement with the Republican nominee to accept public financing") scorned Obama's "effort to cloak his broken promise in the smug mantle of selfless dedication to the public good."

How "aggressively" Obama pursued an agreement with the McCain camp is a legitimate question. Jake Tapper's blog on ABCNews.com (Political Punch, 6/19/08) reported:

Obama campaign counsel Bob Bauer met with McCain campaign counsel Trevor Potter and, according to Obama spox Bill Burton, Potter "immediately made it clear there was no basis for further discussion," that they weren't interested in any sort of agreement. "McCain and the RNC had spent months raising and spending money for the general election, and their basic attitude was 'You'll catch up,'" Burton says, suggesting that the Republicans were also turning a blind eye to the activities of 527s.

Tapper also reported the Republican contention that Obama did not "try to negotiate at all with the McCain campaign." The thrust of the piece appeared to take McCain's side, as it was headlined, "Obama to Break Promise, Opt Out of Public Financing for General Election."

While Obama has been thus disparaged for his "flip-flop," the media have largely ignored McCain's reversal on the same issue--a reversal which may have actually been illegal. Early in his campaign, McCain pledged to accept public financing for the primary elections, but on February 6 he reversed his decision. According to the Washington Post (2/16/08), in November McCain took out a $3 million loan, using his forthcoming public money as collateral.

Under Federal Elections Commission (FEC) regulations, the Post reported, a candidate who uses the promise of public funds as collateral is legally bound to stay within the public financing system. On February 25, the Democratic National Committee filed an FEC complaint against McCain, charging him with violating spending limits (Politico, 2/24/08; Media Matters, 6/26/08)--a move that attracted minimal media interest.

Media Matters (6/26/08) noted that outlets including the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Fox News' Special Report and CNN have omitted mention of McCain's loan when quoting his criticism of Obama's "flip-flop":

This is a big deal. It's a big deal. He has completely reversed himself and gone back not on his word to me, but the commitment that he made to the American people. That's disturbing.

While most mainstream media have paid little attention to McCain's turn-around on public financing in the primaries, more coverage has been given to his "flip-flops" on offshore oil drilling and Bush's tax cuts. But while Obama's campaign finance decision was pronounced "emblematic of his uncanny ability to renege on promises, brush off transgressions as if they were unimportant, and prevaricate with an ease that inspires marvel" (USNews.com, 6/20/08), McCain's "flip-flops" are frequently explained away, or even viewed as evidence of his moral character. The Miami Herald (7/2/08) argued:

John McCain and Barack Obama have been accused of flip-flops recently. However, there is a significant difference: McCain changed his position on drilling off our coasts in order to make a difference in our dependence on foreign oil and as an extra safeguard for our nation. Obama changed his stance and rejected public funding for his presidential campaign to benefit himself.

Contrasting Obama on public finance with McCain on offshore drilling, ABC's Sam Donaldson declared (This Week, 6/22/08):

There's a difference there with John McCain. He can say, circumstances have changed. I mean, if hanging fixes the mind, try $5, $6, $7 a gallon gasoline to fix the mind. And he can say yes, but today we have to do something different. So he flip-flopped on energy but he can say that.

Never mind that offshore drilling will have at best a minimal effect on gas prices (Beat the Press, 6/19/08)--or that Obama can plausibly claim that "circumstances have changed" when his opponent reneged on a signed commitment to accept public financing.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen (6/24/08) claimed to see evidence of virtue in McCain's lengthy record of policy reversals:

Here is the difference between McCain and Obama -- and Obama had better pay attention. McCain is a known commodity. It's not just that he's been around a long time and staked out positions antithetical to those of his Republican base. It's also -- and more important -- that we know his bottom line. As his North Vietnamese captors found out, there is only so far he will go, and then his pride or his sense of honor takes over. This -- not just his candor and nonstop verbosity on the Straight Talk Express -- is what commends him to so many journalists.

U.S. News & World Report's Gloria Borger (7/7/08), on the other hand, seemed to excuse McCain's shifts not based on a core consistency but on an essential inconsistency:

In a way, McCain may have less to lose because the public already sees him as unpredictable. So when he flips his positions to conform with GOP orthodoxy on tax cuts (he now supports) and immigration (build the fence first), it doesn't seem so odd that he then tacks to the middle on global warming or panders to frustrated motorists on offshore drilling. It's part of the "don't pigeonhole me" trademark, which has its appeal to independent voters. McCain's inconsistency fits the brand, so voters may forgive him.

Voters may or may not forgive him, but it's clear that McCain's cheering section in the corporate media already has.

See the most recent issue of Extra!: "The Press Corps' Unshakeable Crush on McCain: Some Straight Talk About the Media's Favorite 'Maverick'" by Peter Hart (5-6/08).

This article is available at: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3569

SCOTUS has been busy...

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:30:58 EDT

real nice, eh? Greg Palast is one of the very few REAL truth-outers we have left in the media!!! you can subscribe at gregpalast.com (but be careful when you forward, because someone unsubscribed me and i had to actually contact them directly to get them to let me resubscribe; apparently one of my 'friends' didn't appreciate the information!) Court Rewards Exxon for Valdez Spill by Greg Palast Chicago Tribune (revised) [Thursday, June 26, 2008] Twenty years after Exxon Valdez slimed over one thousand miles of Alaskan beaches, the company has yet to pay the $5 billion in punitive damages awarded by the jury. And now they won't have to. The Supreme Court today cut Exxon's liability by 90% to half a billion. It's so cheap, it's like a permit to spill. Exxon knew this would happen. Right after the spill, I was brought to Alaska by the Natives whose Prince William Sound islands, livelihoods, and their food source was contaminated by Exxon crude. My assignment: to investigate oil company frauds that led to to the disaster. There were plenty. But before we brought charges, the Natives hoped to settle with the oil company, to receive just enough compensation to buy some boats and rebuild their island villages to withstand what would be a decade of trying to survive in a polluted ecological death zone. In San Diego, I met with Exxon's US production chief, Otto Harrison, who said, "Admit it; the oil spill's the best thing to happen" to the Natives. His company offered the Natives pennies on the dollar. The oil men added a cruel threat: take it or leave it and wait twenty years to get even the pennies. Exxon is immortal - but Natives die. And they did. A third of the Native fishermen and seal hunters I worked with are dead. Now their families will collect one tenth of their award, two decades too late. In today's ruling, Supreme Court Justice David Souter wrote that Exxon's recklessness was ''profitless'' - so the company shouldn't have to pay punitive damages. Profitless, Mr. Souter? Exxon and it's oil shipping partners saved billions - BILLIONS - by operating for sixteen years without the oil spill safety equipment they promised, in writing, under oath and by contract. The official story is, "Drunken Skipper Hits Reef." But don't believe it, Mr. Souter. Alaska's Native lands and coastline were destroyed by a systematic fraud motivated by profit-crazed penny-pinching. Here's the unreported story, the one you won't get tonight on the Petroleum Broadcast System: It begins in 1969 when big shots from Humble Oil and ARCO (now known as Exxon and British Petroleum) met with the Chugach Natives, owners of the most valuable parcel of l and on the planet: Valdez Port, the only conceivable terminus for a pipeline that would handle a trillion dollars in crude oil. These Alaskan natives ultimately agreed to sell the Exxon consortium this astronomically valuable patch of land -- for a single dollar. The Natives refused cash. Rather, in 1969, they asked only that the oil companies promise to protect their Prince William Sound fishing and seal hunting grounds from oil. In 1971, Exxon and partners agreed to place the Natives' specific list of safeguards into federal law. These commitment to safety reassured enough Congressmen for the oil group to win, by one vote, the right to ship oil from Valdez. The oil companies repeated their promises under oath to the US Congress. The spill disaster was the result of Exxon and partners breaking every one of those promises - cynically, systematically, disastrously, in the fifteen years leading up to the spill. Forget the drunken skipper fable. As to Captain Joe Hazelwood, he was below decks, sleeping off his bender. At the helm, the third mate would never have collided with Bligh Reef had he looked at his Raycas radar. But the radar was not turned on. In fact, the tanker's radar was left broken and disasbled for more than a year before the disaster, and Exxon management knew it. It was just too expensive to fix and operate. For the Chugach, this discovery was poignantly ironic. On their list of safety demands in return for Valdez was "state-of-the-art" on-ship radar. We discovered more, but because of the labyrinthine ways of litigation, little became public, especially about the reckless acts of the industry consortium, Alyeska, which controls the Alaska Pipeline.

Several smaller oil spills before the Exxon Valdez could have warned of a system breakdown. But a former Senior Lab Technician with Alyeska, Erlene Blake, told our investigators that management routinely ordered her to toss out test samples of water evidencing spilled oil. She was ordered to refill the test tubes with a bucket of clean sea water called, "The Miracle Barrel."

In a secret meeting in April 1988, Alyeska Vice-President T.L. Polasek confidentially warned the oil group executives that, because Alyeska had never purchased promised safety equipment, it was simply "not possible" to contain an oil spill past the Valdez Narrows -- exactly where the Exxon Valdez ran aground 10 months later.

The Natives demanded (and law requires) that the shippers maintain round- the-clock oil spill response teams. Alyeska hired the Natives, especiallly qualified by their generations-old knowledge of the Sound, for this emergency work. They trained to drop from helicopters into the water with special equipment to contain an oil slick at a moments notice. But in 1979, quietly, Alyeska fired them all. To deflect inquisitive state inspectors, the oil consortium created sham teams, listing names of oil terminal workers who had not the foggiest idea how to use spill equipment which, in any event, was missing, broken or existed only on paper.

In 1989, when the oil poured from the tanker, there was no Native response team, only chaos. Today, twenty years after the oil washed over the Chugach beaches, you can kick over a rock and it will smell like an old gas station. The cover story of the Drunken Captain serves the oil industry well. It falsely presents America's greatest environmental disaster as a tale of human frailty, a one-time accident. But broken radar, missing equipment, phantom spill teams, faked tests -- the profit-driven disregard of the law -- made the spill an inevitability, not an accident. Yet Big Oil tells us, as they plead to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, as Senator John McCain calls for drilling off the shores of the Lower 48, it can't happen again. They promise.

Linn County Central Committee

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:51:52 EDT

just got in from the linn co central committee meeting; home of Cedar Rapids....a lot of you have asked, and i have some info from our elected officials who were there (as always) tonight;

80% of our government buildings were flooded, resulting in about 40 million in damage just to the facilities

25% of those flooded out of their homes were over 50 yrs old
35% of the individuals were under 18, and 8% were under 5
thirty churches were flooded
we lost 55 of 56 of our city wells
over one million cubic yards of waste will be generated just from flood waste (some comparison to six football fields piled however many feet into the sky, i didn't get it all but it was a big number)
it is anticipated that it will be approximately 10 years before the city recovers

we do have some needs in the campaign offices; several of the fellows and staffers here were flooded out and lost everything; the levees broke and took over the area VERY quickly, there was little to no time to prepare. Derek Eadon at the Linn County office, only when asked, advises that some gift cards to Target or gas cards (extra miles have been required in transit, as some had to be relocated out of town and still work in town) would be appreciated; the address is

Attn: Derek Eadon
1229 1st Ave SE
Cedar Rapids, IA 52401

Derek is a long term field organizer for the Obama campaign and is now at the county level organizing for us. Derek was the one that taught me the first class on caucus math (and tried again a few times!! to no avail...).

of course the Red Cross is still in desperate need of assistance as well. you cannot imagine the devastation. a few of our central committee members were flooded, and many of them have been a part of the devastation personally as part of their jobs. our jail has been evacuated, one of our two hospitals were evacuated...one smaller town in our county suffered 98% of their property destroyed. they are requesting FEMA trailers.........

and we aren't talking clean flood waters here....we are talking thousands and thousands of gallons of raw sewage and oil and chemicals.....it's ugly. they are asking that anyone who goes into these areas wears a HEPA filtration mask (and N95) and gloves and boots. and of course that updated tetanus.

anyone who wants more info can feel free to email me.

thanks O family!

Unity Speech

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 02:56:49 EDT

thought I'd repost this one, cuz I think it's so important for us to stay aware of...

Barack titled his speech "A More Perfect Union." It's a speech not about racism, it's a speech about the divisiveness of poverty. That poverty has gotten better and worse over the years, and when poverty takes over, we each become more egocentric and self-protective.

There was another very smart man named Abraham Maslow, who wrote on the hierarchy of needs (Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Maslow ). When the lower level needs are being consistently met, and met even for some who are particularly traumatized for generations, then we are allowed to move up that hierarchy, and meet other needs.

The first levels of course are for physical needs, and once those are met, we meet safety needs, and then love and belonging, self esteem, and self-actualization goals, progressively as the goals before it are recognized as being met.

This division has been propagated repeatedly by those 'haves' against those 'have nots' or 'have lesses' (remember the Star Bellied Sneeches from Dr Seuss?); we all strive to be haves. When we see others in competition with us, we become protective out of human nature. The haves get to set the tone on this, they control the media, and control the wealth. They tell me that I should be jealous of that person who gets this benefit, and should object loudly when this person receives assistance with that major problem; all the while controlling the legislature and passing bills that cost us millions and billions; far less than the welfare recipient's benefits would cost. Subsequently, that recipient of services begins to feel completely powerless to get out, and this is propogated through the haves suggesting they are dispicable and deserve oru contempt.

We all know how to motivate a child to do something; praise them for doing it part of the way, or praise their desire to learn. Don't beat them down!!!

When our needs are not met or we worry and fear that they won't, we go into fight or flight mode. We seek, through fear, to find the reason we are have-nots and, especially with the suggestion from the 'haves' we attack, based on biological drives. Fear is a HIGHLY motivating emotion!!! The haves play that to the hilt!!

As our country slips back into this economic divide, we will again revert to those 'fear' based tactics, and in fact we see many still stuck there, based not on their history but on the fear they carry from their parents or their parents' parents.

Our job, as Obama supporters, is to remember that there is a GREAT DEAL OF FEAR; fear of the unknown (Barack Obama, a culture we don't readily understand and are not familiar with, of our own future and safety and having physical needs met). Fear is the motivation for change in these lower levels of the hierarchy.

SO, this is why we see so much fear, and why we feel as if we are battling it; we indeed are, as others feel threatened in, while not SO often their need for physical safety, their need for security of the structure, resources, employment, health, and prosperity. Let's keep that in mind as we interact, both here on the blogs and out in the 'real life.

Feel free to comment, share your perceptions; "let's have a discussion."

How do we know? What can we do??

Thu, 29 May 2008 09:24:44 EDT

Yes folks, I’m talking about those who live under the bridge and desire that we follow them there.

“I believe that most trolls are sad people, living their lonely lives vicariously through those they see as strong and successful.

Disrupting a stable newsgroup gives the illusion of power, just as for a few, stalking a strong person allows them to think they are strong, too.

Remember that trolls are cowards; they'll usually post just enough to get an argument going, then sit back and count the responses (Yes, that's what they do!).” http://www.flayme.com/troll/#How

“There is no better way to shift a troll from a newsgroup than simply to ignore it. Sometimes, that is not possible; perhaps it has succeeeded in upsetting people.

Here are the five types identified loosely;

Spamming troll: Posts to many newsgroups with the same verbatim post.

Kooks: A regular member of a forum who habitually drops comments that have no basis on the topic or even in reality.

Flamer: Does not contribute to the group except by making inflammatory comments.

Hit-and-runner: Stops in, make one or two posts and move on.

Psycho trolls: Has a psychological need to feel good by making others feel bad.

No more OOPS!!

Sat, 24 May 2008 23:22:02 EDT

blackboxvoting redistrubution (and the video joe is referencing is American Blackout, it's rather long but fascinating and full of data!!). here's a link! American Blackout (2006)

here's what i got from blackboxvoting.org:

Distribute. Reprint. Digg. Spread. Blog.

The upcoming Black Box Voting 2008 Tool Kit ( -
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.html - ) contains innovative
strategies to put real muscle into election protection. This e-mail
contains a preview in the area of deterrents. We know we can't make elections
perfect, but we CAN work on doing ENOUGH! So here's a place to start.

I think we're all sick to death of the "Oops Excuse." You know what I
mean: Robo calls that pretend not to know they just told people
something misleading, oops. Ballot accounting forms that don't add up, oops.
Voting machine keys that don't get put in the bag, causing polls to open
late, oops. Not enough machines allocated to certain precincts, oops,
misleading translation on the ballot, oops, voting cartridges delivered
late, oops, memory cards that cause machines to be serviced
mid-election, oops, reported the wrong vote number, oops...

* * * NO MORE OOPS * * *

I want to talk about why it's so important to reduce the opportunity to
Just Say Oops, and how we can deter the Oops, but first, here are
examples of Oops Excuses just ready and waiting. These happened on Tuesday
this week in Oregon:
This is being discussed HERE:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/74040.html

IMPOSSIBLE AND IMPROPER NUMBERS FROM OREGON'S MULTNOMAH, POLK, AND
YAMHILL COUNTIES

- Results reported before they exist.
- Results reported before the polls close.

A rather wonderful voting rights citizen volunteer named John Howard
went to the results reports posted by Multnomah County at this Web site
Wednesday night and was surprised to see that results posted on Wed. May
21 at 4:28 pm time and date-stamped on 3:53 pm May 22, which happens
to be Thursday!
http://www.mcelections.org/2008-05/results.shtml

Look at these pictures to see what I mean:
http://www.bbvdocs.org/OR/multnomah/May08-impossible1.jpg
http://www.bbvdocs.org/OR/multnomah/May08-impossible2.jpg

Check out the time the results were uploaded. Then look at the time and
date stamp on the results: The report was "run" nearly 20 hours LATER
than it was posted!

NOT A BIG DEAL? "OOPS?"

Now, don't run out and headline that I'm calling this fraud, because I
am not. What I AM calling it is incorrect and improper and unacceptable
and in the case of the Yamhill and Polk county results I'm about to
tell you about, probably illegal.

Elections, like bookkeeping and your bank statement, are all about
numbers. The books have to balance. And in elections, times and dates are
all-important. After all, if the report could be produced a DAY ahead of
time, why not a MONTH ahead? If the computer clocks (oops) aren't
reading out the right day, that opens doors to mail-in ballot-counting
fraud that may be simply too scrumptious to resist.

What happened in Multnomah County suggests that the reports from the
system are able to be set to whatever time the operator desires and/or
that someone deliberately reset the clock on the system to a time in the
future. Think about it this way: If your company bids on a tendered
construction project in Multnomah County, and bids are advertised to close
at a specific time, are you allowed to "bend the clock"? No, and if
you try that you'll likely be charged with attempting to rig the bid. If
you are successful in coercing a County employee into falsely dating
and time stamping your documents, that employee would likely be fired for
dishonesty and charged with falsifying documents. This is a
presidential election we're talking about - at the very least, it's as important
as a procurement bid.

POSTING COUNTY-WIDE RESULTS BEFORE THE POLLS CLOSE:

Polk County and Yamhill County, Oregon posted results on the Internet
BEFORE the polls closed, at 7:31 and 7:41 pm, respectively. The polls
didn't close until 8 pm.

(BUT REALLY. ARE A FEW OOPSIES SUCH A BIG DEAL?)

Oopsies enable unfair election practices and can be enablers and
cover-ups for fraud. It's like this: Do you close the gate so the child
doesn't get near the street, or -- oops! -- leave it open -- oops! left it
open again -- no big deal, all I did was leave a gate open, it's not
like he got killed or anything.

Our collective refusal to accept the Oops Excuse is a method to keep
more gates closed to prevent certain types of fraud -- ie, the plausible
deniability kind -- from escaping.

We should also look at these Election Oops excuses through a real world
lens. For example:

If you write 29 checks but your bank statement says there were 27, does
that feel "safe enough" to you?

What if you get a bank statement dated a month in the future with a
reported balance? (With ballots, of course, the public really can't check
to see whether the reported results are true or false.)

Many election officials are county AUDITORS and CLERKS. These
professionals are collecting license fees, and overseeing bookkeeping and
financial transactions that (even in small counties) amount to millions of
dollars. Somehow I think if they showed up with $28,000 missing from the
public bank balance, the media wouldn't accept "Oops" as readily as it
accepts missing and mismatched and impossible election numbers.

ARE WE BEING TOO TOUGH ON ELECTION OFFICIALS? Let's look at the
accountability expected of others:

- The teenager working at the mall has to balance the till at the end
of the day.
- Chuck E. Cheese pizza parlor employees have to correctly account for
the tickets.
- McDonald's employees have to match cash to receipts.

In fact, anyone who's worked in a bar or a supermarket or any kind of
retail setting knows that you can't just say "oops" when the cash in
your till doesn't match the receipts. You don't get to change the time
stamps on things and you aren't allowed to open and close at the wrong
times.

If we can require accountability from teenagers and minimum wage
workers, perhaps it's time we start requiring our election officials to
report only votes that actually exist at the time and date the computer
assigns to the report, MAKE SURE THE NUMBERS BALANCE, and pay attention to
the clock to make sure we don't post results until the polls close.

No More Oops.

Watch for the 2008 Tool Kit for ways to invoke consequences -- and
ultimately DETER -- the next crop of Oops Excuses.

* * * * *

Black Box Voting is a national nonpartisan, nonprofit elections
watchdog group working to improve public controls in our elections. More:
http://www.BlackBoxVoting.org

Bev Harris
Founder - Black Box Voting

Please help us print the Tool Kits...we are planning to distribute
10,000 of these Pocket Election Protection Guides FREE, in addition to
making them available for download on the Internet. I got a great price,
but the print run will still cost a bundle, as will shipping and mailing
them to the college students, retired folks, computer guys,
accountants, writers, and information collectors we have in mind. Would you like
us to send you one? Let us know, and while you're doing that, remember
that we are supported entirely through small citizen donations. If not
now, when?

TO DONATE: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/donate.html
to mail:
Black Box Voting
330 SW 43rd St Suite K
PMB 547
Renton WA 98057

blackboxvoting.org

Thu, 22 May 2008 23:04:22 EDT

i received this yesterday from BBV, but didn't have time to post til now:

In this article you will find tools to help you analyze the numbers as they come in from Kentucky and Oregon's May 20 primary elections. New info: 2008 Tool Kit: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.html. You can find more Oregon & Kentucky tools, and discuss here: http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/74040.html

Kentucky is a big problem, Oregon is just plain strange. I'll start with Oregon's all mail-in voting system before I tell you the news about Kentucky. In Oregon, 100 percent of votes are absentee, or mail-in, although citizens do have the option to take their mailed ballot to an elections office to drop it off.

OREGON'S SURPRISING ELECTION DATA*

*Source: http://www.eac.gov/files/Eds2006/eds2006/Copy%20of%20eacdata(3).xls (Excel spreadsheet, huge mamajama, allow time to download. And see end of this article for tips on how to use.)

1. EVER WONDER ABOUT SIGNATURE VERIFICATION? Here's a little pop quiz: Out of 1.4 million Oregon votes in 2006, and knowing how people's signatures change over the years, how many signatures would you expect to mismatch?

ANSWER: Out of 1.4 million, the state of Oregon claims that 29 counties had ZERO mismatched signatures, and in the 10 remaining counties that reported mismatches, the grand total was (drum roll please)..... 34 ballots.

(contn below)

it's going to come up

Mon, 12 May 2008 22:23:22 EDT

barack voted for some legislation while he was in the state senate about Dilation and Extraction terminations; it's going to come up. here is a link that addresses it.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pba1.htm

i'm sure there are better sources.

most importantly we need to NOT let them get away with using the words "partial birth" abortions. that's not what it is. period. we need also to know that it's a VERY small portion of these procedures, less than 3k a year.

i am in the process of researching this furhter, and will try to keep my blog updated. anyone with feedback please please provide it!!

indiana voters beware!

Mon, 05 May 2008 10:37:04 EDT

this has some CRITICAL information for Indiana voters, and in fact all voters; PLEASE READ!!!

various points are made in this, and each deserves attention. it's a very reputable and long standing group called blackboxvoting.org.

In April 2008 when Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita announced the
release of "record high" voter registration rolls, with 4.3 million
voters set to vote in the Tuesday May 6 primary, he didn't mention that a
whopping 1,134,427 voter registrations have been cancelled.

Now, the voter rolls are supposed to be tidied up prior to each
election. Indiana's last general election was in Nov. 2006, and they have had
a slew of special and general elections since then. So how have 1.1
million voters -- 26 percent of the current statewide list -- escaped the
voter registration cleanup squad? Who are these million voters and
where do they come from?

One quarter-million of them come from just two northwestern Indiana
counties: Lake and Porter. Lake County reports purging 137,164 voters and
neighboring Porter County cancelled out 124,958 voters.

Lake County, the home of Gary, Indiana, has spawned the Jackson Five
and a great old musical (The Music Man) and has been referred to as "the
second most liberal county in America." Lake County also has one of the
heaviest concentrations of African-American voters that you'll find
anywhere in the USA.

Nearby Porter County, the home of Valparaiso, is 95% white and went
solidly for Bush in the 2004 election. It's also got a lot of college
students.

For whatever reason, these two counties had ... what ... massive data
entry problems? Exceptionally messy records? Lots of dead people who
climbed back into their graves? I truly hope we aren't going to see a lot
of disappointed voters on Tuesday, when they perhaps learn that they
were among the lucky million people who got purged.

HERE'S WHERE THE HEAVIEST INDIANA PURGES ARE:

Lake 137,164 48% (Gary)
Porter 124,958 115% (Valparaiso)
Marion 68,120 10% (Indianapolis)
Monroe 66,009 85% (Bloomington)
Tippecanoe 53,456 58%
Madison 42,952 47% (Anderson)
Hamilton 42,325 26%

Here's a picture map with the numbers and percentages for the whole
state:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/cancelled-from-indiana-voter-rolls.png

The percentage represents the ratio of the number of purges to the
current voter list. Example: If a location currently has 100,000 voters on
its rolls, and purged 53,000 along the way, we assign a ratio of 53% to
the purge vs. current list.

It would be nice to have the original quantities, it would make for a
cleaner number, but this is not available on the Secretary of State's
Web site, so I haven't got a tidier statistic for you, wish I did. I also
wish the time period for these purges was clearly indicated, but it is
not indicated -- nor can it be derived -- from available information
at Indiana's official election Web site.

TOOLS YOU CAN USE

It's always interesting to look for impossible numbers on election
night, like the "more votes than voters" situation that sometimes crops up.
It speeds things up to have a place to plug the information in. Here
is a spreadsheet -- quick and not too fancy, I'm sure you can improve on
it. It has every Indiana county, along with their official registered
voter statistics for the 2008 primary, and some historical data from
1992 to the present, along with links for the source documents from the
secretary of state:

http://www.bbvdocs.org/IN/state/quickrank-INDIANAreg.xls
(Excel file, 71 KB)

Here are links that may be very good to provide additional statistical
information which you can plug in:

http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/elections/index.html

And here is a link to the source document containing the cancelled
registration information used for this article:

http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/pdfs/Statewide_Voter_Count_by_County5.1.08.pdf

Here's a quick spreadsheet with the Indiana voting machines by county
-- you can get that on the Sec. State's Web site too, but it's not in a
database format. You can cut and paste these into your analysis sheets
if you'd like to get comparisons of results by county.

AND NOW ABOUT THOSE VOTING MACHINES

Another press release on the Indiana Secretary of State's Web site
deals with the $360,000 penalty he's hitting Microvote with for failing to
follow the law. Oh yes, and the Microvote Infinity voting machine,
which will be very widely used in the Tuesday May 6 primary, has been
DECERTIFIED!

That's not going to stop anyone in Indiana from using it, however. The
decision was that anyone who already bought these things gets to use
them -- despite the fact that these machines have been embroiled in
lawsuits in at least three places, one in Pennsylvania for machines that
just didn't work, and two in Tennessee where candidates have asked to redo
elections due to bizarre anomalies -- like vote totals that wandered
away in the wee hours of the night.

Microvote's insurance company declined to cover the firm, according to
yet another lawsuit, because the insurance company alleged that
Microvote was selling defective products. The judge ruled against the
insurance company, saying the product wasn't defective, it just didn't work.

I haven't plugged this in yet, but those of you who are comfortable
with spreadsheets can quickly add the voting machines by county to your
voter registration spreadsheet, using that voting machine spreadsheet I
linked above, to see how many votes all together will be subjected to
Microvote.

Ah, but we aren't done with Indiana voting machines yet. Indiana is
also fond of the ES&S paperless iVotronic touch-screens, the ones that
lost 18,000 votes in Sarasota County Florida and were the subject of a
blistering report by Dan Rather. In Rather's report, he showed shocking
footage of the touch-screens being manufactured in a sweat shop in the
Philippines. Their quality control test was to shake the machine and if
it didn't rattle, it passed the test.

THINGS YOU CAN DO ABOUT INDIANA

1. Do some public records requests to either the state or the counties,
and ask for their VRG-5 form, which is the NVRA tracking form on which
the number of voters purged must be reported.

For tips on how to do the records requests, here's our tool kit, scroll
down to the section on public records:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.html

Post the documents and ask for any advice you need here, and report
your front-lines information for both Indiana and North Carolina here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/73/73.html

I'm pushing hard right now to get TOOL KIT 2008 done -- it's a
stripped-down model with emergency measures for the fall election. Unless you
tell me not to, I'll let you know as soon as it's ready for download.

2. Another useful form you can request: The CEB-9 form, which is the
Indiana County Election Report that must be turned in after the election.
Here's one, take a look at the information it contains:

http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/pdfs/CEB-9.pdf

3. If you are a number-cruncher, grab the spreadsheets here and wail on
'em during Election night. You can get additional historical
information from this site:
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/index.html
(Choose the drop-down menu "general by state" and select Indiana, then
choose the year you want. Confusion factor -- this site color-codes
Republican as blue and Democrat as Red. Has lots of good stuff).

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: People usually catch things like "more votes
than voters" weeks after the election. The dang Indiana information
doesn't break voter registrations out by party which makes crunching the
primary numbers a little harder. But you may still get the jump on some
red flags if you track this stuff as it's coming in on spreadsheets that
tell you what the stats are going in.

A WORD ABOUT THE TV PROJECTIONS

You'll notice that those projections often change -- sometimes
dramatically -- just an hour or so later. That's because we have learned that
they are paying elections officials (through their associations or
otherwise) to call and fax them the results off the voting machine poll
tape.

In fact, the National Election Pool (used to be Voter News Service) is
getting this stuff BEFORE the election officials and way before the
secretary of state.

The first number they quote is the adjusted exit poll number, and it
comes from asking people about who they voted for. The point here is,
when what you thought was "exit polls" suddenly changes, that is the
impact of those called-in poll tape results. Yep. That's the voting machines
talking, and when they say something different than the people
answering the exit pollers' questions, we should be looking at the programming
on the machine, not the exit pollers, for answers.

I expect to see early projections altered significantly as soon as
those poll tape numbers are called in to NEP.

So to recap, good things to do Tuesday:
1. Public records
2. Number crunching
3. Pray

Good luck to us, all,

Bev Harris
Founder - Black Box Voting

Please help us protect 2008, muster up the "Dream Teams" for field
work, print the Tool Kits...
We are supported ENTIRELY through small citizen donations.

no honorary degree from northwestern for you dr wright...

Sat, 03 May 2008 16:46:43 EDT

apparently northwestern had extended an honorary degree to Dr Wright. it seems that they've withdrawn it. since i'm a grad student there, i was sent an fyi copy of the letter sent to Dr Wright. here it is...

Following is the text of a statement by Alan K. Cubbage, Northwestern
University Vice President for University Relations, regarding the
University's decision to withdraw an invitation to the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah
Wright to receive an honorary degree.

May 1, 2008
Earlier this academic year, acting on the recommendation of faculty
committees, Northwestern University extended an invitation to the Rev. Dr.
Jeremiah Wright, former senior minister of Trinity United Church of
Christ in Chicago, to receive an honorary Doctorate of Sacred Theology at
Northwestern’s Commencement in June. Commencement at Northwestern is
a time of celebration of the accomplishments of Northwestern’s
graduating students and their families. In light of the controversy around
Dr. Wright and to ensure that the celebratory character of Commencement
not be affected, the University has withdrawn its invitation to Dr.
Wright.

Dr. Wright was quoted as saying that his invitation to receive an
honorary degree was withdrawn by Northwestern President Henry Bienen because
Dr. Wright “wasn’t patriotic enough.” If Dr. Wright was quoted
accurately, that statement is not true. In his conversation and
correspondence with Dr. Wright in March, President Bienen never characterized
Dr. Wright’s views or made a judgment about them. The letter said,
“In light of the controversy surrounding statements made by you that
have recently been publicized, the celebratory character of
Northwestern’s commencement would be affected by our conferring of this honorary
degree. Thus I am withdrawing the offer of an honorary degree previously
extended to you.”

Barack on Unity

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:31:49 EDT

reposted from marytnurse's blog;

We all know how to motivate a child to do something; praise them for doing it part of the way, or praise their desire to learn. Don't beat them down!!!

what will you do

Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:06:20 EDT

if the elections are suspended? let's share how best to protest...

Barack's speech on Unity

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:56:34 EDT

We all know how to motivate a child to do something; praise them for doing it part of the way, or praise their desire to learn. Don't beat them down!!!

When our needs are not met or we worry and fear that they won't, we go into fight or flight mode. We seek, through fear, to find the reason we are have-nots and, especially with the suggestion from the 'haves' we attack, based on biological drives. Fear is a HIGHLY motivating emotion!!! The haves play that to the hilt!!

As our country slips back into this economic divide, we will again revert to those 'fear' based tactics, and in fact we see many still stuck there, based not on their history but on the fear they carry from their parents or their parents' parents.

Our job, as Obama supporters, is to remember that there is a GREAT DEAL OF FEAR; fear of the unknown (Barack Obama, a culture we don't readily understand and are not familiar with, of our own future and safety and having physical needs met). Fear is the motivation for change in these lower levels of the hierarchy.

SO, this is why we see so much fear, and why we feel as if we are battling it; we indeed are, as others feel threatened in, while not SO often their need for physical safety, their need for security of the structure, resources, employment, health, and prosperity. Let's keep that in mind as we interact, both here on the blogs and out in the 'real life.

Ok, I'm done now...feel free to comment, share your perceptions; "let's have a discussion."

Corporate Media

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 04:15:35 EDT

Folks forget how much that media that we lament so often makes from our viewing them. BILLIONS for the main three cable news shows. BILLIONS. Their corporate owners have no investment in sharing the news, especially when it comes to fair and equitable treatment of the candidates. We need to stop expecting it.

Also, demanding it only from them 'just won't do!' We need to be contacting their sponsors. If you are so inclined, send a copy along to the corporate media outlet.

This is a great site to read about the media and who owns it; http://www.takebackthemedia.com/owners.html

Here's another good source; http://www.freepress.net/

Center for Public Integrity allows you to find out who owns YOUR LOCAL stations!! Also has a great link to seek out whichever media you want to specifically know about; http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/

FAIR is a great source of covering the news and has some tracking info on who owns what; http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1406

This site is my favorite; http://www.stopbigmedia.com/chart.php?chart=radio

Now, who wants to add on the sponsorship links for, oh say Fox News, owned by Rupert Murdoch and Newscorp (who, btw, is maxed out to Clinton's campaign) ?

It's Christmas Afternoon in Iowa

Tue, 25 Dec 2007 15:47:11 EST

Twas 10 days before caucuses and all through the state

The SUN IS SHINING BRIGHTLY, our lunch it was great!

When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter

I crawled off the couch to see what was the matter....

When what to my wondering eyes should appear?

But yards FULL of signs saying

"Obama!" and "Hope"--Oh DEAR!!!

My head was aswimming (from the sugar no doubt)

But I'd swear there were more today,

Someone's been putting more out!

Now behind me I heard such a crash and a cuss

I knew my brother dropped something, making a muss

But my family just smiled and knew that by this time next year

We would be packing for DC and preparing our gear

For the Inauguration of Hope, For the promise of Faith

For the future of our Nation, OH we could not wait!

So we cleaned up the mess and said Thank you to God,

As we prepared to eat another snack, not too worried about the bod...

We knew in the next few days we'd get our exercise in,

As we call and we knock and we HELP THIS MAN WIN!!!!!

"America, Our Moment is NOW!" "Let's go change the world!" http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/christmas/marytnurse

Now, Anyone else want to add a line?

Making calls/knocking on doors in Iowa

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:47:00 EST

I was asked last night to provide some guidance on what to say/do for those calling or coming to Iowa to GOTC with us in the next few days. It can be a very intimidating process, but after awhile, it gets pretty comfortable, if you are able to listen. That, I've learned the hard way, is the key.

Keep in mind I haven't done any door knocking because of my foot...maybe by caucus time I can at least go see my neighbors!

ANY of the rest of you Iowa folks that have experience, FEEL FREE to post feedback and offer your insights!!!

See, we here like to talk, or at least have someone feel like what they say is important. This first occurred to me after I tried on my own to initiate some calls and got the cold shoulder. I thought about how Senator Obama made people feel comfortable, and what his greatest strengths were in relating to people.

I start out with an introduction, and sometimes an apology, since we get SO MANY ROBO CALLS, it's insane! I may tell them that I hate to bother them but I also believe what I have to talk to them about is so critical I am going to pester them. Sometimes, depending I think on how dogged I feel by the robo calls (and that may be how many they've gotten today too). ***NOTE: I have now decided that there are enough people (mostly robo-calls) pestering people, I'm DEFINITELY STARTING WITH THE APOLOGY!!!****

I tell them I want to find out how things are going for them, and what issues are important to them. Now, I'm lucky because I know most of our man's policies pretty well, and can look on my laptop as we chat if I don't. This tact always gets them talking, except for those who prefer to remain cagey about whom they'll support; and there are those that will let YOU talk but not give any info; even at that, they will often surrender some info with a discussion of ISSUES and not POLITICIANS, and if nothing else you have an opening to talk about THEIR issues, with OUR candidate's positions superimposed.

I try to work in the things he's the ONLY ONE doing, like the legislation for transparent earmark spending Welcome to USAspending.gov (read Barath's entry on DK) and opposing the Iraq War even when he was running for the Senate for his first term. I talk a little about how thoroughly I've interviewed him myself, and whatever way you came to support him will be important for them to hear.

Pay attention to what PART of Iowa you are talking to, as well; big city, farm country, College/University area, small town, east (liberal) or west (conservative), etc, but don't make decisions based on that as to who you will be talking to.

Don't expect them to respond right away with any sort of excited committment, but close with a 'so can I count on you to "stand up for Senator Obama" at the caucuses?' The stand up thing is a major theme, and one that is tested, so I like to use it; not sure if they feel like it's important or not, but may give them a sense of responsibility to show up.

Try to ferret out whatever reason they aren't going to caucus and answer it...harder to do than it sounds...but be gentle, we aren't huge into the confrontation thing, but don't like a lot of flowery stuff either; tho everyone is different; just do it like Barack would, he's rather a contemorary for us, laid back but direct.

Keep in mind some NEVER have caucused, and don't understand that it's SO critical, and that our votes at caucus are comparable to 20 votes for the rest of the country's primary votes, and that THIS was the chance for their voices to REALLY make a difference.

Also, a lot of people are really afraid of caucusing, they think it will hurt, or I thought you had to make speeches or something. You all know by now what the process looks like, although I understand it can be a bit more harrowing in some precincts, if just one or two people there get wild. It also takes more than an hour, so use the 'about' clause. The important thing for them to know is, show up, sit down with Obama's people who will EASILY be visible from across the room, and read a book or chat with neighbors, or whatever. I believe most precincts will be serving some refreshment in the Obama corner as well. Tell them that their field office will have information about child care options for them, and rides if those are needed.

Most importantly, remember not to go negative, but find a way to say what you are going to say in a POSITIVE frame; like, have you compared Edwards' voting record to his current positions? Barack's have been 100% consistent, and I'm not sure there are too many candidates out there that can say that....Did you notice that every time Senator Clinton or someone from Fox (or whatever, they may not even have heard about kindergate) came after Senator Obama, he protected himself but did not attack? or some way to put it in a positive light; you are representing Barack.

This is a bit rambly, but I wanted to get it posted, to help those who asked for it.

PLEASE feel free to offer feedback, Iowans and former Iowans, and anyone with phone banking experience!

Bill Richardson

Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:32:04 EST

Paul from Iowa City inspired this, by saying he had seen Richardson get a free pass. He won't be viable, but we need to be ready to say why Obama is going to be a better choice. Here's my story.

After I fell out of love with an HRC presidency (hey, I'm a feminist, and it was a natural), I started looking VERY HARD at ethics, and voting records.

I supported Richardson for a time as well, before I found Obama. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, CREW, helped me find detailed accounts of ethical backgrounds on every candidate. Our guy, by the way, has no tags there, but has several endorsements as being the go-to guy for ethics REFORM.

While Governor Richardson had the fewest besides our guy, he does have some hits here http://www.citizensforethics.org/ . Also, his health care plan is good if you're a vet; and that's important, but there are lots of uninsured people out there who are not vets.

And I have a marked concern about his ability to 'hold up under pressure.' He doesn't ever challenge anyone's voting records, and that concerns me because of several faux pas statements he's made on the trail.

He thanked AFSCME at SEIU's endorsement meeting. He said "Yes" to a very clear question asking whether homosexuality was a choice, and then said no. (If he believes it's a choice, he surely should have expected the question and been better able to frame the debate into let's not worry over that, let's talk about rights for all citizens.)

He often skips key events in order to preserve his energies for other venues. For example, at the last minute he skipped a 5,000 member rally in Cedar Rapids to attend a baseball game in Des Moines the night before a debate, in order to be fresh for the Des Moines debate. We noticed. His name was on the ticket, and he wasn't there, but was on the front page of the Register at the game. He's often disheveled and has food stains on his clothes; not a major concern, unless you want to send him to a state dinner with foreign dignitaries.

One of the local radio station here had a DJ who ran into him in a restaurant, and found him to be very sweet, but unpresidential. She said this on the air, of course. She found him to be a mess physically, but thought he was really sweet when she went over to talk to him. She thought he was gracious, and was glad she'd interacted. He asked her how his chances were. She sputtered, and said that she was just glad he'd come to town, and how very difficult running for office must be. The other DJs teased her, saying that maybe he was hitting on her. She was aghast at the thought, and one of the others said that he had a reputation of being a player, and that he may have meant that as much as how his presidential chances were. They all ended up agreeing that the question wasn't clear.

I just worry that he doesn't have the stamina or the quick-thinking that I want my president to have; that we NEED a president to have. I don't want him flailing around when he's asked for a critical decision.

Our guy outshines him on ethics, on transparency, on personal responsibility and values, on femenist values, on 'acting presidential,' on health care, on the environment. These are the issues off the top of MY head where I know Obama has the superior policy. Now granted, Richardson hasn't had the money that Obama and the others have had, but there's a reason for that, at least in Obama's case; he's also had the backing of the grass roots. Clinton has the lobbyists, and Edwards has himself and his buddies-in-law. And money translates to so many things. But Senator Obama has done it from GRASS ROOTS DONORS. He could have too, if he'd have generated the interest in transparent government, the interest in strong government, the interest in personal responsibility for our future, that Senator Obama has done. He's certainly had the platform.

Inspired again!!!

Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:40:56 EDT

I read this site nearly daily, and daily I read the press; mainstream and mostly otherwise; I can't believe how the media has been bought and paid for by the Republican machine and are force-feeding us whatever garbage they see fit. I get depressed and angry listening to the news; so much scandal, destruction of the connstitution and lower and milddle class lifestyles, international injustice and crime...I come here to get recharged! I go out and talk to people and they are ALL excited about Barack. Feminists I'd have sworn would be...errr...supporting someone else, SUPPORT BARACK!!! I have no idea who the pollsters here in Iowa are talking to; I know I have three new caucus goers in my immediate family, and we've none of us been contacted by any polls, and we are all three caucusing for BARACK OBAMA! There was a most fascinating book I read for a class in college, called "How to Lie with Statistics." Thus far, none of these pollsters has disclosed enough information to me for me to determine whether they have manipulated the statistics or if they are just plain old selecting a sample group that they want...either way, they aren't polling people on the streets here in Iowa.

I look at the online responses, especially when for example Front Page does one of their endorsenews posts, and can't imagine how they can continue to ignore the writing on the wall!! Their allegiance to the queen is going to result in them having EGG on their faces. Don't forget, the Des Moines Register is a conservative rag, and the conservatives also want to coronate a queen at the Democratic caucuses.

OBAMA 2008!!!

Ready to start campaigning for Barack

Wed, 26 Sep 2007 01:06:56 EDT

I've gotten a list of contacts here in my little rural town from the area office, and am excited to get started, once I get a bit more information about the people on the lists. Lots going on in my life, but I plan to make Barack a part of it! I am going to meet Michelle tomorrow, and dragging my mother along. The tempo of his race, (and I completely agree, the polls are missing those of us who have never participated in caucuses/primaries before) the excitement I see in the people who are campaigning for him--leaves me so inspired!! Anyone have advice? I'll be starting on the phone, but can see this going most anywhere. I don't know my neighbors well at all, and not sure what sort of reception I'll get. Done some cold calling for my union tho, so not intimidated by sputtering and not knowing how to respond-I got to listen to some experienced canvassers in the union office, and picked up some pointers, but am VERY interested in gathering some from Barack supporters!!! Please, post away!!!

I've amended my signature in my emails to include a link to his new ad here in Iowa, the Hope ad, and am looking for other creative ways to advertise for him. I think we should market bracelets like the ever-growing crowd of live strong spin-offs, and make them blue with red and white stripes, rather like the outlines of the logo. Imprint them with a statement he's made, why we support him, whatever!

I'll quit now...feedback/inspiration on canvassing??

We can't wait

Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:31:26 EDT

for someone else to fix what's wrong! I've never donated to a politician before, I've never wanted to be involved in the caucuses before. I've never written in ANY blog before. When dubuyuh commuted Scooter's sentence, I smiled, as I knew he'd driven more nails into the coffin of the wrong-doers in our society. Scooter gets off, but maybe the politicians will pay.

Why is it that lesser educated women and poorer blacks nationally are favoring Hilary? Is it politics as usual, just knowing what initial she has at the end of her name, and that she has more MONEY? How can Bill Tauzin (R) who championed the Medicare part D reimbursement program leave congress and less than a year later go to work for a drug company for TWO MILLION A YEAR and no one notices? Repeatedly he called on us to find someone who loved their mothers more. Well, now he can pay for it when his mother needs millions of dollars worth of treatment, I guess. Unlike those who will be deprived their medicines under his plan, due to the donut effect. Unlike those who will be turned away from hospitals and allowed to die in overworked and understaffed emergency rooms, managed by a private corporation who decided NOT to treat them as they aren't insured adequately.

Any idea why your insurance companies squawk over you taking some medications and not others? It's not the actual cost of the medications per se, it's the cost that they don't get recouped from the KICKBACK from the drug company. Ask your doctor's office some time around Christmas to see their back desk, see how many trinkets they've gotten from drug companies. Go in at lunch time any day and ask where they got their lunch.

Campaign reform has to take top priority. Why not CAP what they are given for campaigns, and do exactly what Barack did in the beginning and make all campaign financing transparent? Hey, while we're at it, who dumped stocks the day before they went public, after stalling for awhile? What candidates STILL haven't come out with their lists? What initial follows those who never will???

WHY don't we, at a bare minimum, FORCE insurance companies to cover PREVENTION??? We know why they don't want to, but why do we LET them NOT?

It deeply troubles me, as someone who one of my friend has teasingly called a feminazi, to not be able to support the first truly viable woman candidate for president. I am a long standing member of NOW, but I was never asked whom I supported for President before 'our' endorsement was made.

YES I believe national security is an issue--of COURSE I believe that Iraq was becoming a national and international threat. Genocide is NEVER ok. But, aren't we tolerating genocide in Darfur? Iraq was and is no more of an international threat than about 7 other countries that are now being allowed to proliferate arms and build militias unchecked, as all of our service branches' resources are swallowed up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And by the way, where IS that little guy..what is his name again? something like Osama, wasn't it? Oh that's right, we don't care about him. He was the guy that masterminded and funded the terrorist attacks, wasn't he? But this is a war on TERROR, so we don't care about him...

I just saw Sicko last night. It doesn't hurt that I agree with Michael Moore. I'm aware that he rounds his figures to reflect his bias, but his facts and figures are accurate. Watch what happened when Dr Gupta went up against him on CNN. I never imagined that what I would see and hear would bring me--a seasoned health care professional who has been there with the dying, the grieving, the severely abused, the wronged-by-the-system--to tears. I'm not one easily brought to tears.

It's time to do more than cry--it's time to scream from the rooftops! Just before the last election, I got an email about the difference between the republicans and the democrats. I don't recall the details, but it likened the democrats to congenial, easy going folk; the republicans were portrayed as ruthless, bloodthirsty and driven, and that was before breakfast.

First, I plan to push my FRIENDS to quit supporting politics as usual, and start researching those they are committing their votes to. Second, I commit to ask every candidate I can get near what they plan to do about universal health care. Third, I will join as many grass roots efforts as possible to address a universal health care policy, and election reform.

By the way, HR 676 is pending in congress right now! Go research it, if you support it, insist that it gets enacted!!!

No matter who we end up with, I will keep asking for reform in elections, and universal health care. No exception, no differentiating, no waffling once you're elected!