I don't want another Hurricane season with Thelma Bush and the Louise GOP who are taking us all down with them with their Greater Extinction Level Job Performance with Global Warming. I want Al Gore and John Kerry and John Edwards and James Lee Witt now in the midst of Hurricane season in order to save more of our lives.
And, it gets even worse than the GOP's stupidity pushing us into a deadlier climate. See Mark Crispin Miller's new book, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election and Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them), about the fundamentalists takeover of the GOP whose stated goal is Armageddon. So, Bush's Armageddon fundamentalists may be doing a bad job on Katrina and on Global Warming on purpose. If we let them, if we follow them, it would be MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction.
I know Bush is scary, but Global Warming--Climate Collapse--is much scarier. Let's help our families better survive the present Hurricane season and those that follow. Let's have better leaders now. Bush Step Down. Al Gore and John Kerry Step Up.
On Good Leaders
From Altercation by Eric Alterman
http://msnbc.msn.com/....
The Dog Whisperer -- The New York Times Book Review offered a capsule review of a new book by TV dog trainer Cesar Millan (host of the show Dog Whisperer):
Millan likes to talk about the importance of being a pack leader and projecting what he calls "calm-assertive" energy around your dog. The thing to avoid, he writes, is being "angry-aggressive," a trait he identifies in Bill O'Reilly of Fox News. This type of person "would not make a good pack leader," Millan writes, "because the other dogs would perceive him as unstable." (Our presidents are often unable to control their dogs, Millan said in a recent lecture. He added, "We are the only species that follows unstable pack leaders.")
"Calm-assertive" sounds like:
Al Gore and John Kerry.
"Angry-aggressive" sounds like:
Bush and his GOP
Mad
(Mutually Assured Destruction)
with Global Warming.
...................................
PLANS
Plan A: Patrick Fitzgerald. Everyone waits for Patrick Fitzgerald to pull their plug:
Abramoff's Diebold + Ney's HAVA = Non-evidentiary E-voting
The machines will be tossed. Then we win and assume office.
P.S. If it takes some time, in the meanwhile, do not support Rep. Rush Holt's H.R.550 because with only 2% of paper ballot evidence hand counted as a check for accuracy, that means 98% of paper ballots are made secret and susceptible to alteration by scanning. Not good. Unless you like the outcomes of the scanned paper ballots votes for Gore (finally hand counted for accuracy, Gore Won. GORE WON!) and Kerry (please, everyone ask for a hand count of Kerry's ballots now in the midst of Hurricane season, because according to the GAO report, Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman, Mark Crispin Miller, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. ( http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/1
) and Greg Palast, Kerry won. KERRY WON!). Accurate hand counts of scanned ballots are too late. Too late on purpose....or is it?
Plan B: Bush Step Down. Join us, Good Steward and Good Samaritan Evangelicals, Veterans, Reality-Based Financial Folks and Coastal Republicans and like a drumbeat say, "BUSH STEP DOWN NOW, because it is Hurricane season in a Post-Katrina World." Other plans might take longer than your joining us to demand good leadership. Along the coast, your fellow Republicans are getting more Purple and Blue as Hurricane seasons worsen.
Plan C and D: John Kerry, Please Count Every Vote Now in Ohio. No one will think "sour grapes" in the face of a hurricane. If Kerry won, I want to know right now, because as President, Kerry will save more lives than Bush. And, like Gore, he will start the work to reduce or reverse Global Warming, harder to do each day. It is asking too much of us to endure another Hurricane season with Bush and his non-expert cronies, to wait through the danger until the Ohio trial date set for August 22, 2006. What will Bush do then, if a second election's ballot count proves that Bush did not win for a second time? What will the media do, knowing we know more? What do we do, knowing all of this? Knowing all of this, for starters, how do we help Kerry to get those ballots counted now?
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1439
Ohio recount lawsuit set for trial; election workers indicted
by Blair Bobier
September 4, 2005
On Tuesday August 30, a federal district judge set a trial date for the Green Party’s Ohio Recount lawsuit and indictments were handed down against two Cuyahoga County elections officials for their roles in the bungled election audit. The timing was coincidental; the two actions are not related though they both stem from charges that the recount was conducted in violation of state and federal law.
Judge James Carr set the trial date for August 22, 2006. The lawsuit was initiated by Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and his Libertarian counterpart, Michael Badnarik.
The Ohio election and recount has been the subject of a number of investigations and reports. A report by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee’s Democratic staff states that “there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.” The August issue of Harper’s magazine featured an article by Mark Crispin Miller on the Ohio election fraud and the lack of “mainstream” media coverage devoted to it, entitled “None Dare Call it Stolen.” (More)
Plan C and D: Al Gore Won. AL GORE WON! So, now what do we do in a Post-Katrina world? Although very late on purpose, the Florida vote was hand counted for accuracy and found that Al Gore had won--won under all conditions. Apologies to Al Gore for such a strange and awful delay which has further imperiled the world's climate. Al Gore will do a great job as our President as would John Kerry. We really need Gore and his message now. We really cannot wait years to do the right thing. Bush and his GOP with their deadly stupid Voluntary Pollution Laws have accelerated global warming and have pushed the whole world passed the Tipping Point: Time is up.
consortiumnews.com
Gore's Victory
http://www.consortiumnews.com/....
By Robert Parry
November 12, 2001
So Al Gore was the choice of Florida's voters -- whether one counts hanging chads or dimpled chads. That was the core finding of the eight news organizations that conducted a review of disputed Florida ballots. By any chad measure, Gore won.
Gore won even if one doesn't count the 15,000-25,000 votes that USA Today estimated Gore lost because of illegally designed "butterfly ballots," or the hundreds of predominantly African-American voters who were falsely identified by the state as felons and turned away from the polls.
Gore won even if there's no adjustment for George W. Bush's windfall of about 290 votes from improperly counted military absentee ballots where lax standards were applied to Republican counties and strict standards to Democratic ones, a violation of fairness reported earlier by the Washington Post and the New York Times.
Put differently, George W. Bush was not the choice of Florida's voters anymore than he was the choice of the American people who cast a half million more ballots for Gore than Bush nationwide. [For more details on studies of the election, see Consortiumnews.com stories of May 12, June 2 and July 16.]
The Spin
Yet, possibly for reasons of "patriotism" in this time of crisis, the news organizations that financed the Florida ballot study structured their stories on the ballot review to indicate that Bush was the legitimate winner, with headlines such as "Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush" [Washington Post, Nov. 12, 2001].
Post media critic Howard Kurtz took the spin one cycle further with a story headlined, "George W. Bush, Now More Than Ever," in which Kurtz ridiculed as "conspiracy theorists" those who thought Gore had won.
"The conspiracy theorists have been out in force, convinced that the media were covering up the Florida election results to protect President Bush," Kurtz wrote. "That gets put to rest today, with the finding by eight news organizations that Bush would have beaten Gore under both of the recount plans being considered at the time."
Kurtz also mocked those who believed that winning an election fairly, based on the will of the voters, was important in a democracy. "Now the question is: How many people still care about the election deadlock that last fall felt like the story of the century - and now faintly echoes like some distant Civil War battle?" he wrote.
In other words, the elite media's judgment is in: "Bush won, get over it." Only "Gore partisans" - as both the Washington Post and the New York Times called critics of the official Florida election tallies - would insist on looking at the fine print.
The Actual Findings
While that was the tone of coverage in these leading news outlets, it's still a bit jarring to go outside the articles and read the actual results of the statewide review of 175,010 disputed ballots.
"Full Review Favors Gore," the Washington Post said in a box on page 10, showing that under all standards applied to the ballots, Gore came out on top. The New York Times' graphic revealed the same outcome.
Earlier, less comprehensive ballot studies by the Miami Herald and USA Today had found that Bush and Gore split the four categories of disputed ballots depending on what standard was applied to assessing the ballots - punched-through chads, hanging chads, etc. Bush won under two standards and Gore under two standards.
The new, fuller study found that Gore won regardless of which standard was applied and even when varying county judgments were factored in. Counting fully punched chads and limited marks on optical ballots, Gore won by 115 votes. With any dimple or optical mark, Gore won by 107 votes. With one corner of a chad detached or any optical mark, Gore won by 60 votes. Applying the standards set by each county, Gore won by 171 votes.
This core finding of Gore's Florida victory in the unofficial ballot recount might surprise many readers who skimmed only the headlines and the top paragraphs of the articles. The headlines and leads highlighted hypothetical, partial recounts that supposedly favored Bush.
Buried deeper in the stories or referenced in subheads was the fact that the new recount determined that Gore was the winner statewide, even ignoring the "butterfly ballot" and other irregularities that cost him thousands of ballots.
The news organizations opted for the pro-Bush leads by focusing on two partial recounts that were proposed - but not completed - in the chaotic, often ugly environment of last November and December.
The new articles make much of Gore's decision to seek recounts in only four counties and the Florida Supreme Court's decision to examine only "undervotes," those rejected by voting machines for supposedly lacking a presidential vote. A recurring undercurrent in the articles is that Gore was to blame for his defeat, even if he may have actually won the election.
"Mr. Gore might have eked out a victory if he had pursued in court a course like the one he publicly advocated when he called on the state to 'count all the votes,'" the New York Times wrote, with a clear suggestion that Gore was hypocritical as well as foolish.
The Washington Post recalled that Gore "did at one point call on Bush to join him in asking for a statewide recount" and accepting the results without further legal challenge, but that Bush rejected the proposal as "a public relations gesture."
The Bush Strategy
Instead of supporting a full and fair recount, Bush chose to cling to his official lead of 537 votes out of some 6 million cast, Bush counted on his brother Jeb's state officials to ensure the Bush family's return to national power.
To add some muscle to the legal maneuvering, the Bush campaign dispatched thugs to Florida to intimidate vote counters and jacked up the decibel level in the powerful conservative media, which accused Gore of trying to steal the election and labeled him "Sore Loserman."
With Bush rejecting a full recount and media pundits calling for Gore to concede, Gore opted for recounts in four southern Florida counties where irregularities seemed greatest. Those recounts were opposed by Bush's supporters, both inside Gov. Jeb Bush's administration and in the streets by Republican hooligans flown in from Washington. [For more details, see stories from Nov. 24, 2000 and Nov. 27, 2000]
Stymied on that recount front, Gore carried the fight to the state courts, where pro-Bush forces engaged in more delaying tactics, leaving the Florida Supreme Court only days to fashion a recount remedy.
Finally, on Dec. 8, facing an imminent deadline for submitting the presidential election returns, the state Supreme Court ordered a statewide recount of "undervotes." This tally would have excluded so-called "overvotes" - which were kicked out for supposedly indicating two choices for president.
Bush fought this court-ordered recount, too, sending his lawyers to the U.S. Supreme Court. There, five Republican justices stopped the recount on Dec. 9 and gave a sympathetic hearing to Bush's claim that the varying ballot standards in Florida violated constitutional equal-protection requirements.
At 10 p.m. on Dec. 12, two hours before a deadline to submit voting results, the Republican-controlled U.S. Supreme Court instructed the state courts to devise a recount method that would apply equal standards, a move that would have included all ballots where the intent of the voter was clear. The hitch was that the U.S. Supreme Court gave the state only two hours to complete this assignment, effectively handing Florida's 25 electoral votes and the White House to Republican George W. Bush. (More)
Plan E: Parallel Elections and Signed Ballots. If we are unsuccessful for the time being and Bush has not stepped down, and neither Kerry nor Gore has assumed their rightful win (could get complicated, but worth it for problem solving leaders), then by the November 2006 election, we will need to consider Lynn Landes' idea of Parallel Elections and Signed Ballots as Affidavits to challenge the no-evidence e-voting and lever machines and the hidden-evidence scanning machines and their built-in delay as with Gore and Kerry. And, if we win, we assume office. Or, having won we...
....................
It seems that winning may not be the Democrats' problem, assuming power is, which is the point of winning.
Republicans must create Non-Evidentiary systems to win elections with no proof. Democrats are stuck trying to figure out ways to restore evidence to prove a win...in enough time to actually take office. Years later, does no good. Or, does it? Kerry? Gore?
It really is as simple and as hard as restoring evidence, Paper Ballots, monitored and hand-counted on election day. And, it is important for our legitimate leaders to then assume power, despite what compromised media may say. This requires a commitment to a real democracy. This is The Great Restoration, Our Great Restoration.
President Kerry and President Gore, both would be much better leaders. We all must try many things now as we restore our Democracy in order to reverse or reduce Global Warming, the biggest problem for all of us. Time Is Up. Hurricanes will be coming. We need to save our families.
.......................................................
Lynn Landes argues that much better evidence to challenge elections (with no-evidence e-voting and lever machines or hidden-evidence scanning machines) than exit polling is parallel voting and signed ballots:
http://www.ecotalk.org/....
Stand up and be counted!
Plan B: Parallel Elections & Signed Ballots
By Lynn Landes 1/18/05
Something's got to give. Another election is just around the corner. What's it going to be? Another opportunity to document election "irregularities" and computer "glitches"? Another chance to analyze mysterious exit polls? Another exercise in frustration? Another charade.
Democrats will need a mighty good reason to go back to the polls. Many believe that our elections are rigged. And they have good reason. Republicans own the voting machine companies that count 80% of the votes. Congress and the courts are unlikely to change that. And the Democratic leadership has hardly made it an issue.
So, let's do something different. We'll go to Plan B. We'll organize our own "Parallel Elections".
(And, a simpler idea from Lynn Landes which would need publicity before 2006 is: Right after you vote on Election Day, send to the candidate(s) for whom you voted a postcard or letter with your name, address, and signature, and simply state that you voted for him/her. Candidates can use that information to challenge "official" election results.)
A Parallel Election would be held in tandem with the official election. It could be organized on a precinct, county, or statewide basis. And anyone could do it. It's simple. On Election Day, "parallel election pollworkers" (PEPs) would position themselves outside the polls. They would provide voters with "parallel ballots" to mark and a ballot box in which to cast them. At the end of the day, PEPs would compare their tallies with the official election returns. If the tallies don't match, the election can be challenged.
But, the really big deal is this... voters would be asked to print their names and addresses and sign their ballots. What's the point? To provide proof. Candidates need hard evidence in order to challenge election results. A signed ballot would act as a voter's affidavit - as direct evidence of the voter's intent.
Exit polls and audits provide circumstantial evidence, at best. We need much more.
During the 2004 election, tens of thousands of voting rights activists worked the polls. They documented tens of thousands of election irregularities. But, all that documentation didn't provide any direct evidence of how people actually voted. Even when recounts were conducted, as in Ohio, election officials managed to sabotage the process.
The original goal of the secret ballot was to minimize vote selling and voter intimidation. It seemed like a good idea at the time. But, that time has passed. The secret ballot has become the refuge of scoundrels and unscrupulous election officials. It provides perfect cover for vote fraud and system failure.
A signed ballot is not such a farfetched idea. In the 1700's and 1800's, "There was no right to a secret ballot; having sworn in as a voter, the voter may have simply called out his choices to the election clerks who sit... behind the judge tallying the vote," writes University of Iowa professor Douglas W. Jones.
In some parts of Switzerland, citizens still follow the ancient custom of electing their government by an open show of hands on the last Sunday morning of every April.
Think about it. The U.S. Congress, state assemblies, and even town councils, all vote in public. Why should our votes be kept secret? What are we afraid of? Are we afraid we'd lose our jobs if our employers knew how we voted? That ship has sailed - quite literally. Millions of jobs in America have already been outsourced to foreign countries. It's only going to get worse if we can't boot these lunatics out of office. Are we afraid that some voters will sell their votes? Oh, you mean like our legislators already do? Listen. I wouldn't make vote selling legal, but I wouldn't get my shorts in a twist over it, either. Or, are we afraid to disappoint our friends and family? It's more important not to disappoint yourself.
A Parallel Election serves three purposes. First, it introduces authentic voting to American citizens. Second, it asserts local control over the voting process. And third, it provides a platform from which to seriously challenge election results.
So, what do you think? Does a Parallel Election make sense? Does it stand a chance? Will people respond? I certainly hope so, because otherwise we're left with some pretty dismal choices, all framed in a negative context. I think this is a positive project that's worth a try. I'm game. If you're interested, send me an e-mail at lynnlandes@earthlink.net.
Let's show our machine-made politicians that we will stand up and be counted.
Lynn Landes is one of the nation's leading journalists on voting technology and democracy issues. Readers can find her articles at EcoTalk.org. Lynn is a former news reporter for DUTV and commentator for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
Contact info:
lynnlandes@earthlink.net / (215) 629-3553
* Funding and structure: This is a grassroots effort, so there is no real funding or official structure for this project. Most precincts have between 500-1000 voters. That means that you would need to copy that many ballots and an equal number of pamphlets. Plus you need a ballot box, which can be a cardboard box. It all should run under $200.
* A secret ballot: Voter information on the ballot could remain concealed unless a challenge is made. The ballots could be on legal size paper. The bottom of the page would have the voter's information and could be folded over itself and "glue sticked" in order to keep the voter's identity secret.
CHECKLIST FOR ORGANIZERS:
THE DRILL -- 'PE' Pollworkers are to hand informational PE pamphlets to voters as they go into the polls, and then offer a PE ballot as the voters exit the polls. At the end of the day, count the votes and compare it to the official count. If the count is off, report it to the Board of Elections and issue a press release.
* Pick a precinct - it could be your own or a precinct that has experienced voting "irregularities" in past elections
* Determine the precinct boundaries if you're going to do a pre-Election Day pamphlet drop.
* Determine the number of registered voters (so you know how many copies of the ballot you need to make). Call your Board of Elections for this information. It may also be online.
* Design the ballot. Please label the ballot "PARALLEL ELECTION BALLOT". Do not copy the official ballot. Leave a place for people to print their name, address, signature, and date. To provide the voter some secrecy, fold the ballot over that info and use a glue stick to seal it shut. It would only be unsealed in the event of a challenge. Allow the voter to participate without signing the ballot, if that is their desire.
* Create or buy a tally sheet
* Make ballot box - a cardboard office storage box could work.
* After the election, retain ballots and tally sheet until next election.
START ASAP WITH OUTREACH:
* Call a meeting to organize public support - see SAMPLE PRESS RELEASE, below Keep the press and public informed. Do regular press releases to local news media - print, radio, TV (announce the effort, meetings, etc.)
* Contact area civil rights groups and religious organizations for support, including local colleges, etc.
* You can do pamphlet drops (SAMPLE PAMPHLET) or mail-outs before the election, but at the very least, be at your local poll on election day - that includes primaries. It's a great time to introduce voters to the concept. Although one person could handle the job, two or more is definitely better.
* Write letters to the editor / do talk radio & community TV / post info on internet (such as: http://www.indymedia.org/....
* Order bumper stickers and decals (although I have some that say www.BanVotingMachines.org that you can use, I'm probably going to order others that announce this project. You can also order your own. The following webpage has my supplier's contact information - http://www.ecotalk.org/....
* Talk to people in your precinct as much as possible. One-on-one encounters are the most effective. Have voter registration forms available, as well. But, don't fill it out registration cards for voters. Advise voters to fill it out and mail it themselves.
(SAMPLE PRESS RELEASE)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
The Parallel Election Project (PEP) is hosting an open meeting on (day), (date), (time) at the (place), (address). Citizens concerned about security risks posed by voting on machines, early, or absentee are invited to attend. For more information, contact: (name - optional / phone / e-mail - optional / website - if available)
.....................................
Now more than ever, winning elections also means assuming power as Bush and his GOP shills with their unregulated voluntary pollution laws have pushed us passed the Tipping Point on Global Warming, endangering all of us, all of our families:
.....................................
Research commissioned by The Independent reveals that the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has now crossed a threshold, set down by scientists from around the world at a conference in Britain last year, beyond which really dangerous climate change is likely to be unstoppable.
http://news.independent.co.uk/...
Global Warming: Passing the 'Tipping Point'
By Michael McCarthy
The Independent UK
Saturday 11 February 2006
...an investigation by The Independent has established that the CO2 equivalent concentration, largely unnoticed by the scientific and political communities, has now risen beyond this threshold.
This number is not a familiar one even among climate researchers, and is not readily available.....So we asked one of the world's leading experts on the effects of greenhouse gases on climate, Professor Keith Shine, head of the meteorology department at the University of Reading, to calculate it precisely. Using the latest available figures (for 2004), his calculations show the equivalent concentration of C02, taking in the effects of methane and nitrous oxide at 2004 levels, is now 425ppm. This is made up of CO2 itself, at 379ppm; the global warming effect of the methane in the atmosphere, equivalent to another 40ppm of CO2; and the effect of nitrous oxide, equivalent to another 6ppm of CO2.
"The passing of this threshold is of the most enormous significance," said Tom Burke, a former government adviser on the green issues, now visiting professor at Imperial College London. "It means we have actually entered a new era - the era of dangerous climate change. We have passed the point where we can be confident of staying below the 2 degree rise set as the threshold for danger...."
The 400ppm threshold is based on a paper given at Exeter by Malte Meinhausen of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Dr Meinhausen reviewed a dozen studies of the probability of exceeding the 2 degrees threshold at different CO2 equivalent levels....
(More behind subscription wall)
.......................
The whole planet, we have passed the Tipping Point, because even now, Hurricane Bush and his GOP are causing global warming to go faster and faster as they continue to pollute the planet at a record setting pace.
.......................
http://www.truthout.org/...
Scientists Condemn US as Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Hit Record Level
By Steve Connor
The Independent UK
Wednesday 19 April 2006
The United States emitted more greenhouse gases in 2004 than at any time in history, confirming its status as the world's biggest polluter. Latest figures on the US contribution to global warming show that its carbon emissions have risen sharply despite international concerns over climate change.
The figures, which were quietly released on Easter Monday, reveal that net greenhouse gas emissions during 2004 increased by 1.7 per cent on the previous year, equivalent to a rise of 110 million tons of carbon dioxide.
snip
Scientists in Britain condemned the increase, saying that it showed how the US was failing to take a lead in the international attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions despite being the worst offender.
.......................
Time's Up. We do this right, right now.
Can we recover from the present tipping point or not? In the face of not knowing for sure, we still have to try as Gore said.
......................
From CBS News
(link:http://www.cbsnews.com/...)
Al Gore has a major campaign under way - to change policies on global warming.
...a problem Gore calls "a planetary emergency."
Gore's movie and book about the issue, both called "An Inconvenient Truth," are set for widespread release in May.
Gore has warned about the dangers of global warming for years, arguing that without dramatic changes in the emission of greenhouse gases, the planet is likely to experience a dramatic increase in violent storms, infectious disease, deadly heat waves and rising sea levels that will force the evacuation of low-lying cities.
He plans to hold a training session in Nashville this summer on how to deliver the message on climate change.
.......................
Maybe if we started naming Hurricanes (now 50% stronger and many more of them) after the culpable Republican shills for polluters, they would start doing something.
from:
http://www.dailykos.com/....
Senators who don't believe in climate change - or at least not in doing anything about it
by jre
Mon Jun 27th, 2005 at 15:32:03 PDT
Here are the Senators who voted to table a "Sense of the Senate" resolution stating that global warming exists and the Senate should take some kind of action about it:
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-NE)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Any Senator on this list who indeed does believe in global warming would be wise to clarify that at this point.
.................................
Think it could not get worse? It can, if Republicans believe their goal is Armageddon.
Or, maybe this is just a cover story to hide the GOP's complicity for Climate Collapse. Republicans don't want to be rightfully blamed for more and bigger hurricanes, heat waves, fires and droughts--killing more people than 911 or terrorism ever did. And, the longer we wait, the ever larger climate events and ever larger extinction events are created. There would be no curse harsh enough to describe the damage done by Bush's Republicans. The GOP needs the slogan, The Party of Life, to hide for cover as they behave in a deadly, opposite direction.
So, maybe the Republicans' cover story is to blame GOD (Apocalypse) for their guilt, culpability in denying, while accelerating Global Warming.
Or, maybe Republicans really do believe their goal is Armageddon and that is why they do such a horrible job...because it is on purpose.
................................
Mark Crispin Miller
http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.co...
C-span's BookTV program:
C-SPAN2 Appearance
Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election and Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them)
Description: Mark Crispin Miller argues that the outcome of the 2004 election, in many states including Ohio, was manipulated to favor George Bush and the Republican party. He discusses the evidence he has for this charge and talks about the reaction that Sen. John Kerry had when presented with the evidence. Professor Miller also argues that the Republican party has been taken over by religious fundamentalists who see their opponents as evil and whose ultimate goal is to bring about Armageddon.
..................................
from: http://www.dailykos.com/...
Main Stream Ohio Republicans Fear Election High-Jacking
by JellyPuddin
Excepts taken from Online Journal and Findlaw
Mainstream Ohio Republican leaders now fear their party--and the state--are about to be highjacked by the Rod Parsley/Ken Blackwell fundamentalist machine unleashed by Bush and Rove in the upcoming Governor's race.
Extremist right-wing screachers, such as Pastor Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church, Ann Coulter, Alan Keyes, Ohio gubernatorial candidate J. Kenneth Blackwell and followers of Jerry Falwell, have taken center pulpit in an escalated war over what really happened when George W. Bush was allegedly re-elected in November, 2004, and who will occupy the Buckeye Statehouse in 2006.
In the 2004 Presidential debacle in Ohio there were many dubious successful efforts to curtail the Democratic vote and sway the election towards George W Bush.
Such as:
William Anthony, the Democratic Chair of the Franklin Country Board of Elections, revealed that on November 2,2004, a number of voting machines were transferred from inner city precincts to Parsley's suburban church. Thousands of African-Americans were deprived of their vote due to the fact that their precincts lacked sufficient balloting hardware. But voters at Parsley's extreme right-wing precinct had no such waits.
And also:
In keeping with Blackwell's faith-based tally of the Ohio vote, the New Hope precinct broke new ground. In the now infamous "loaves and fishes" parable precinct Gahanna 1B, after 638 citizens cast ballots there, the precinct's divinely inspired voting machines registered 4,258 votes for George W. Bush. (more)
................................
No one should be in government with responsibilities over our families lives who has these Apocalyptic views. We need people who will help us survive, not Apocalyptic fundamentalists who will try to end all of our lives on purpose.
................................
To win elections and assume power, some may consider independent exit polling. However, it is a lesser degree of evidence with which to challenge elections than Signed Ballots as affidavits.
See Mark Crispin Miller's site http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.co...
To help organize an independent polling effort for 2006 elections to challenge machines and determine truth of voting results.
MCM replies:
Of course, it's crucial that we monitor the races closely on this next Election Day, but there is something even more important to be done, and which we therefore must start planning NOW.
This year there will be no official exit polls conducted. The media consortium that paid for them in previous elections isn't going to do it any more, ostensibly because such polls have been "exposed" as unreliable; and so we will have no way to determine whether the official vote-counts can be trusted.
What we need, then, is a grass-roots exit-polling operation, preferably conducted nationwide, or at least in all those states where Senate seats are up for grabs, and in those districts where Republicans are looking vulnerable. If we don't make this effort, we will have no empirical basis for judging the credibility of the official numbers. If, on the other hand, we DO conduct such crucial polls ourselves (that is, if we, the people, do it), we will have grounds for refusing to acknowledge all the startling "upset victories" that Team Bush surely has in store for us (again).
This is what happened in Ukraine--a grass-roots exit-polling effort that enabled the Ukrainian people to stand firm against the government. We should do likewise; and it should be rigorously non-partisan, using student teams of pollsters, under the close supervision of professional statisticians.
So far, NO national organization has taken on the growing danger of election fraud. While MoveOn claims to have been heavily involved in this all-important fight, that's really ALL that they have done (i.e., make that claim); and no other national org--not Common Cause, not People for the American Way, not the League of Women Voters, nor any other national group--has stepped up to the plate.
There are terrific grass-roots groups at work from coast to coast, doing all they can to block the use of DRE machines and otherwise clean up the system: in New York, California, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Arizona, Washington, New Hampshire and elsewhere. In short, the troops are out there, and the spirit's more than willing, and God knows the need could not be greater; but there isn't any of the funding necessary to meld such disparate groups together into an effective national movement for reform.
So if you have any ideas as to how to get MoveOn, and/or any other national group, to do what must be done--a stepped-up campaign for election reform; thorough monitoring of races nationwide; grass-roots exit polls--please share them. All I could do was write the book, and all I can do now is talk it up as much as possible. To spark the sort of movement you describe, we all need to push really hard, and push together.
................................
Bev Harris talks about the politics of the inside game and outside game needing each other in order to form a successful movement. She also says that Secrecy is the danger with the Rush Holt bill (H.B.550).
...............................
http://www.bbvforums.org/...
Why the Rush Holt bill (H.B. 550) is dangerous
There is a major push right now to pass H.B. 550, a bill put forth by Rep. Rush Holt to mandate a paper trail (along with a flimsy audit that no accountant would agree is adequate).
Election reform groups are split on whether they support H.B. 550. Black Box Voting normally does not weigh in on legislation, this time we will.
Like an antibiotic that's too weak, we belive that H.B. 550 will create a more resistant strain of election infection.
Like a placebo, people may think the election system is getting well when in fact, the medicine is only a sugar pill that makes everyone think it's better. For a minute.
Paul Lehto, an attorney who is a leader in the election reform movement and the plaintiff in a groundbreaking lawsuit related to electronic voting, has a unique clarity in public policy issues. Lehto says:
"[the] paper record requirement, combined with a worse than anemic audit feature, is so darn dangerous in terms of its ability to create false confidence...
"Putting into the Holt bill a provision specifying the method of EAC audit (2% or more precinct sampling) simply telegraphs to cheaters how to cheat and not get caught..."
Any major political movement has the inside game and the outside game
The inside game involves writing letters, lobbying, working with legislators, and in the case of a privatization issue like voting machines, meeting with vendors and working with regulatory groups.
The outside game involves investigative work, communications on subjects even when they are considered impolite, exposés, agitation, occasional civil disobedience, and an overwhelming push to give citizens power over those who govern them.
The inside game resists the outside game
Those who play the inside game tend to believe that the outside game is undisciplined, a bunch of mavericks, endangers the goal. The inside game is polite, conciliatory, respects authority and likes to tell others what to do.
"Support H.B. 550 it's good push this button send this email now."
Those who question and probe are painted as irresponsible.
There is no doubt that Black Box Voting usually plays the outside game. We know we'll be attacked from within the movement -- from the establishment-oriented inside game - for taking the position that H.B. 550 is will do more damage than good.
But here it is: Black Box Voting believes that H.B. 550 is unwise. It will not be effective to improve citizen oversight or election integrity. It is dangerous, because the weakness of the antibiotic will create a more resistant strain of election manipulation.
The likelihood is that, if H.B. 550 is passed, it will simply "prove" that electronic voting works "fine."
It was a "fine" election...
As another blogger noted, notice the frequency with which elected officials are now using that word. I suppose it's an improvement over a couple years ago, when they called us "terrorists", but I still scratch my head when I hear the new talking point: "We had a fine election." Not "we had an accurate election." Not "we had a fair election." We had a fine election. What do they mean by that?
Well, rest assured that electronic voting will look just "fine" under the Holt bill because, as Paul Lehto notes, the way the audits are set up they won't catch anything to make the election look "not fine." To solve the inadequate auditing provisions in the Holt bill will require drafting a whole new bill.
So if H.B. 550 is passed, everyone will pat themselves on the back and go home and not a damn thing will actually change, except that more taxpayer money will be expended for retrofitted machines.
The inside game people want the current kinds of technology to work
And -- note the players involved, like those involved in testing and setting standards -- many of them will have no role in this if they don't make the current kinds of technology work. Note the recent Calif. Senate/ITAs transcript, where Systest Labs refers to the meeting in Nov. 2005 -- you know, the one where all the industry perps showed up but the public, and even the chair of the California Senate Elections Committee were excluded. Systest reports that the academics seem to be heading toward creating an IV&V effort, another layer of testing and certifying.
More taxpayer money, more scientists, more paychecks, more layers of complexity, more people to point the finger at when elections turn out to be secret unsubstantiated messes.
The inside game has tolerance for a much longer timeline
You don't need to hurry if you don't think any crimes will be committed.
The inside game is addressing the problem by adding a "vvpat" and quibbling over just how to do a 2 percent audit, or layering test labs into the process, or ponderously altering standards in response to critical security failures, while grandfathering old systems in for years.
No major reform movement will survive without the outside game
The civil rights movement would not have gotten very far without the outside game. Rosa Parks was outside game. The Selma-to-Montgomery March was outside game. The civil rights workers -- some of whom were killed -- were outside game.
The anti-Viet Nam movement would have failed without the outside game. Viet Nam Vets Against the War were outside game. Burning draft cards was outside game.
The outside game knows it needs the inside game, because when the message is sufficiently focused and the goals are sufficiently clear and the people themselves are beginning to drive the train, it gets pitched to the inside game and changes are made to legislation.
But it isn't just legislation that is pushed down the tracks by the outside game. Media tends to gravitate towards coverage of the outside game. The message of the outside game sticks in the public's consciousness better then legislative bill numbers. After the outside game succeeds in pushing the message into the mainstream, embedding it in the public psyche, change becomes more durable.
The inside game doesn't necessarily think the outside game is necessary. Because the outside game pushes the envelope, opening up new frontiers, it pushes concepts into the mainstream that are -- by definition -- not really accepted yet. When you focus on the establishment to achieve your goals, it helps to distance yourself from the outside game. The smartest of the inside game strategizers recognize how the ecosystem works, though, and often provide discreet support and/or intelligence to the outside game.
Less savvy inside game strategists allow themselves to be persuaded that the outside game puts the agenda at risk, endangers the country.
This can be helped along by disruptors (posing as part of the movement) who are actually working for the opposition. In the civil rights movement, and in the anti-Viet Nam War movement, there were paid infiltrators who posed as activists, but those individuals persuaded many real activists over to a more controlled, less "dangerous" point of view. They also helped pit them against the outside game.
It's all part of the play book.
You don't catch criminals by passing a rule against it.
The outside game defines the problem a bit differently. Let me give you an analogy to show how the current inside game fails when one assumes there just might -- possibly -- be a criminal enterprise at work in certain election situations.
Let's say it's small, localized, and simply mercenary. For $40,000 a guy with inside access will make sure a developer-friendly commissioner gets in. To get the guy in, he arranges to exploit a known hole in voting machine security.
Now, the Rush Holt bill will have you wait a couple years before it even gets to the rules committee, where the lobbyists step in and gut the bill. So it won't protect 2006, because it wont be in effect by then, and it probably won't protect 2008 because even if it makes it to the rules committee, it will be weakened when it gets behind closed doors.
So the guy pockets his $40,000 and the commissioner gets into office. It will almost certainly never be discovered, because there are no audit provisions anywhere for electronic voting machines likely to catch this stuff, but let's say it does get caught.
If you're playing the inside game, you take this example of the $40,000 cheat and spend nine months discussing it into new standards, then a couple years to grandfather the old voting systems, and finally, around 2009, you address what the guy did for $40,000 back in 2006.
By this time, another guy is selling elections using a different back door. He builds a better hack, having learned from the NIST discussion what they ARE looking at. All he has to do is go where they are not looking.
If you're worried about national politics, listen up:
In a time-critical situation, the inside game runs out the clock.
Let's not call this dirty tricks or Rovian spin or pretend it is just the way hardball politics work. If we can't substantiate the data in our elections systems (both voter registration and votes) these weaknesses will attract people who want to manipulate elections. Subverting election-related data is a criminal act. If it involves more than one person, it is a criminal enterprise.
If criminal enterprises want to manipulate a national election by attacking the data, that criminal entity will be thrilled to see activists derailed into sincere actions that actually just run out the clock.
Efforts to steer everyone to the inside game is a bit insidious. Think for yourself.
The idea that you can solve election fraud by making standards, putting machines into testing labs, and doing poorly defined, weak, and statutorily limited audits came about because the inside game thought it was impolite to define the problem accurately.
It's not about a paper trail -- It's about banning SECRECY
If we want a trustworthy system, we need to be unafraid to entertain the idea that if you make any facet of elections secret (other than who a person votes for), it will attract criminals. Such a temptation may take place inside a voter registration database or voting machine vendor's operation. In the case of a rogue programmer, management need not even know (if the programmer is positioned correctly). It may exist inside an elections office, or with a pollworker, or through a political operative....
Save your lobbying for something that eliminates secrecy. And if only a computer scientist can understand it or only an elections official can monitor it, it's still secret. H.B. 550 doesn't do much of anything to get at the core problem, which is secrecy.
PERMISSION TO REPRINT OR EXCERPT GRANTED. MUST LINK TO http://www.blackboxvoting.org.
.................................................
If Non-evidentiary machines are still in our elections by November 2006, the following is an option for election officials and voters:
.................................................
Plan F: Election Day 2006--Your Chance to Get Evidence
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/23120.html
Please forward to your local elections officials:
The following may be useful for all E-Voting equipment
Warning: Black Box Voting has received credible first-hand reports from multiple states that Diebold is making unannounced visits to counties, sometimes when the elections supervisor is out of town. Diebold has prevailed on assistants and managed to gain access to the voting equipment.
Elections employees report to us that their questions to Diebold are not being answered to their satisfaction.
Here is what to look out for, and why this is so important:
1. Program changes: Watch very carefully whether Diebold puts a card into your machine and boots it up. Alert your staff to be on the lookout for this. By inserting one card, either the operating system or the voting software can be altered. Inserting two cards can change both.
Such changes can hide evidence of the kind of security vulnerabilities found by Harri Hursti and Security Innovation Inc. in Emery County, Utah. However, replacing the operating system and programs does not ensure the integrity of your machines, since the security vulnerabilities found appear to be able to survive overwriting both the operating system and the programs.
2. Swapping out equipment or components: We have credible reports that Diebold has swapped motherboards in some machines. We have less firm reports that Diebold has made reference to repartitioning memory and/or other adjustments. Either swapping the motherboard or repartitioning could obscure evidence of programming that shouldn't be there, and/or introduce new vulnerabilities to your system.
3. Swapping or recording serial numbers. The Diebold serial numbers do not appears to be burned into the machine/motherboard itself, but are simply affixed with a plate that can be replaced.
You should, immediately, photograph each of your machines' serial numbers.
Diebold denies that they have sold used equipment. However, a recent response from Deborah Seiler, the former Diebold sales rep who is now Elections Registrar for Solano County, California, gives a perception that someone is not being forthcoming.
Solano County used the Diebold TSx for one election and then rejected the system. Seiler, who took office shortly after Solano rejected the Diebold equipment, has reportedly responded to a public records request for the Solano County TSx documents containing the serial numbers that the documents were given back to Diebold and that Solano County no longer has them.
Diebold's odd explanation in Utah, that there were perhaps Chinese or Asian fonts on touch-screens delivered to Utah, would be consistent with selling machines from California. There were some 800 to 900 TSx machines, apparently, rejected by Solano County.
Black Box Voting encourages all recipients of "new" Diebold TSx machines to log serial numbers immediately, photograph or videotape them, and do so before Diebold arrives to visit your machines if at all possible.
It would be a good idea to take the keys to the voting machine storage facility with you when you are not in the office. Advise your staff not to allow Diebold to access your machines without your presence.
If Diebold comes to visit your machines, you are advised to tape record, videotape, and have several witnesses present to observe exactly what they do.
Better yet, tell them you need a written work order specifying what they will be doing in detail before you authorize it, and stand over them to observe during any access to any part of your system.
Diebold is a private company. As soon as you took delivery on your system, you have the responsibility to be in control of it and observe at all times. You are under no obligation to allow a vendor access (even if your state has mandated that you take these machines).
The upcoming security report, along with the testimony of Wyle Labs at the California Senate Elections Committee hearing last week, provide clear indications as to why preservation of your system AS IT WAS DELIVERED TO YOU should remain "as is."
.........................
The Voter: Your chance to get evidence
Telling stories about problems you saw is no longer good enough. It doesn't produce much change. Real election reform requires real citizen oversight, and oversight means taking easy steps so you can capture real evidence if an election problem occurs.
Real evidence = audio or video recording, public records, photos
WHAT TO WATCH FOR
- Voter disenfranchisement (obstruction of voting)
- Voting machine problems (malfunctioning machines and security problems)
...This article concerns the VOTING -- a later article will describe how to oversee the COUNTING. Feel free to distribute this information to your circle of influence.
What to bring with you when you vote:
1. Small audio recorder. Available for about $40 at Radio Shack. Smaller than a cell phone.
- As soon as you get out of your car to go vote, hit "record."
- Make sure it is recording.
- Then just ignore it, go to the polls, vote.
- At all times, you should be discreet -- you don't need to hide the recorder, but waving it around is asking someone to object.
- The objective is to get OTHER people on the recording, not your own voice. Ask simple questions -- it's the answers that count. Don't make speeches and don't be confrontational. Make sure that what is recorded depicts you as a reasonable and polite person.
- See state rules on freedom to tape without consent, at (BBV site, more info)
2. Take your cell phone or a small camera. Use it to take pictures if something goes wrong, and to call the media.
3. Small pocket notebook so you can record location, names, machine serial numbers if needed....
Voter eligibility problems
1. Suppose you try to vote but they say you're not registered?
Start with prevention -- Rules have been changing. Check on the status of your voter registration well before the election.
If it's election day and you are told you're not registered: Request a provisional ballot. They must give you a provisional ballot, but it won't count if the records show you are not registered. Voting by provisional ballot is significantly inferior to same-day or absentee voting, since these ballots may not be counted if it "won't make a difference" and sometimes are not accounted for very well.
2. Suppose you try to vote but they ask for ID?
Best thing to do: Bring a valid photo ID just in case. Some states have changed the law and do now require it.
Access to the polls
1. What if your polling place is closed when you get there?
First, prevention - many polling places have changed due to new disability requirements; some have been eliminated due to the cost of buying new voting machines. Check with the elections office (don't depend on friends or news publications). Make sure you go to the right place in the first place, and allow extra time.
2. What if you know it is the right location, but can't find where to vote?
Sometimes the voting location is in another part of the building. Look for signs and ask, and use your audio recorder to capture any obstructiveness by any public officials.
3. What if you can see the polling place, but it isn't open for business?
Document this with your audio recorder and ask lots of questions. Take photos of the lines. Record conversation if people have to leave and are unable to vote. Get their name if possible. Note the poll locaton and the time.
If poll opening is significantly delayed, call the media. If it is delayed more than an hour, report it to someone who has access to lawyers (such as a candidate or legislative representative). Briefing papers may need to reach a judge by 11 a.m. or noon in order to extend the hours for that polling place.
If poll opening is delayed due to voting machine problems, when you get inside ask questions of the poll workers and record their answers to document the problem.
4. What if polls are open but lack the equipment or supplies to vote? For example, some of the voting machines are not working, there aren't enough ballots, or some other item (like a card encoder or check-in computer) is not working?
Ask questions and make sure your audio recorder is running to capture the answers. Don't get confrontational -- this isn't about hearing your own voice on audio, it's about documenting the explanations and answers you get.
You generally cannot take photos or video inside a polling place -- but some places will allow this. If you can get a photo that shows the problem, do so.
Here are things to jot down in your notebook if you witness a problem:
- Precinct location
- Names of poll workers
- Name of your county/township elections chief
- Names and contact info for any other citizens who witnessed the disenfranchisement
Voter intimidation or discrimination
1. What if you witness discriminatory or hostile procedures? Examples include inappropriate challenges of voters, ethnically inappropriate remarks, or police checkpoints or surveillance of polling places.
Make sure your audio recorder is running before you get there, and keep it running. These things happen by surprise.
Get photos of any obstruction, and note the location, names of witnesses, names of perpetrators.
Voting machine problems
Most states have a mixture of optical scan machines (which use paper ballots) and DRE machines (touch-screen or roll-a-dial computers).
The DRE machines have significantly more issues.
If you have a choice between a DRE and a paper ballot optical scan, always choose the paper ballot.
Here's what to look for with DRE machines:
- Your vote shows up on the wrong choice
- You can't see the paper record of your vote (some states don't have one, but in states with a DRE voter verified paper trail, it may be hidden under a brown door or other obstruction)
- Confusing machine: Hard to figure out how to use it
- A candidate or question is missing from the screen
- The screen automatically fills in votes you don't want
- The screen fails to report to you that your vote has been accepted. Usually it will say something like "vote cast" -- or the message can be more confusing, like "choices printed."
- Voting machines aren't running
- You see an error messages on the screen
- You see an administrative or technician screen instead of the ballot choices
- The voting machine crashes or freezes
- The voting machine screen is dim, has lines through it, colors are distorted or is otherwise hard to read.
- Your card won't work
- (For accessible machines) The accessibility function aren't working (headphones, large text, keypads, sip n puff)
- Repairman is working on one of the voting machines
What to do: Write down (or photograph with your cell phone) anything that looks "weird".
Have your audio recorder on and ask questions, record the answers. Even if you are technically savvy, keep your questions simple and innocent and you'll elicit more information. For example:
- "What's that?"
- "Who's that guy?"
- "How come he's..."
- "What's he doing?"
- "What did he just put in the machine?"
- "Where's he taking that?"
- "Where do those cables go?"
- "Where are the [Diebold/ES&S] guys?"
If possible, stand around and watch if someone comes to fix your machine. Ask a couple simple questions and audio-record the answers.
Optical scan machines
WHAT TO LOOK FOR:
- Kicks out your ballot or won't take it
- There is a little window or message screen on the optical scan machine. Look at it before you run your ballot through. Watch what it says before, during and after. Record or photograph any weird messages on the screen (such as "ballot not read.")
- Make sure to notice and document if voted ballots are being kept on a counter, basket, or a locaton that is not sealed. Correctly designed optical scan systems make your ballot disap