Sunday, May 21, 2006

Why is (sic) the Media Downplaying Our Voting Scandal?

I think anyone who knows me knows I am unalterably, and stridently convinced that the 2004 'electile dysfunction' was made possible by premeditated, probably criminal, arguably traitorous tampering with the electronic ballot casting and counting machinery. More than 25% of all the ballots cast in that process are irrecoverable bits: 30 million ballots were cast into the void, and it would have required turning only one in every 10 of those to have presented the Busheviks with their putative majority.

So Danny Schecter's piece on Common Dreams is apposite. Here's the money quote:

The public on the other hand not only believes that there are problems but
many insist that the elections were stolen.

Write Wasserman and Fitrakis: “A recent OpEdNews/Zogby People's poll of Pennsylvania residents, found that “39% said that the 2004 election was stolen. 54% said it was legitimate. But let’s look at the demographics on this question. Of the people who watch Fox news as their primary source of TV news, one half of one percent believe it was stolen and 99% believe it was legitimate. Among people who watched ANY other news source but FOX, more felt the election was stolen than legitimate. The numbers varied dramatically.”


“Here, from that poll, are the stations listed as first choice by respondents and the percentage of respondents who thought the election was stolen: CNN 70%; MSNBC 65%; CBS 64%; ABC 56%; Other 56%; NBC 49%; FOX 0.5%.


“With 99% of Fox viewers believing that the election was “legitimate,” only the constant propaganda of Rupert Murdoch’s disinformation campaign stands in the way of a majority of Americans coming to grips with the reality of two consecutive stolen elections.”


Bi-partisan Commissions have studied this problem. One led by ex-president Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker noted, “Software can be modified maliciously before being installed into individual voting machines. There is no reason to trust insiders in the election industry any more than in other industries."
A recent Wall Street Journal story revealed, "Some former backers of the technology seek return to paper ballots, citing glitches, fraud fears."


Aviel Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University, did an analysis of the security flaws in the source code for Diebold touch-screen machine. After studying the latest problems, The Times reported Rubin said: "I almost had a
heart attack. The implications of this are pretty astounding."

That strikes me as an understatement...

2 comments:

Eli said...

One of the prerequisites for transforming a democracy into a dictatorship is to remove/cripple/corrupt the mechanisms of accountability. Elections are one, the media are the other. The Republicans are two for two.

Emphyrio said...

Easy for me to say, in a vote-by-mail state, but I think this is going to come down to civil disobedience on a grand scale.

People literally smashing electronic voting machines, providing paper ballots as substitutes, and waiting to be arrested.

Otherwise nothing will change. Republicans will continue to eke out surprise upsets where they win with the exact percentage their Dem rivals had over them in the polls.