Slashdot Mirror
No Secret Ballot for Military Personnel?
belmolis writes "According to this editorial in today's New York Times, US military personnel for whom regular absentee ballot procedures are inconvenient are being provided with a questionable alternative, the Electronic Transmission Service, run by a private contractor, Omega Technologies. According to the NYT, the secrecy of ballots could be breached when they are faxed or emailed from the field, when they are in the hands of Omega Technologies, or when they are in the hands of local officials. The NYT was unable to obtain any information on security procedures from the company or from the Pentagon. A manual describing the system can be downloaded here [pdf document]. Like Diebold, Omega is far from non-partisan. Omega President and CEO Patricia Williams has donated $6,600 in this election cycle to the National Republican Congressional Committee and is a member of its Business Advisory Council."
First, identify who votes for Bush and who votes against him. Then eliminate the people against and put more people who are pro. Now you have control of the armed forces. Everything else falls in line after that easily.
here
Ballots *could* be compromised at all sorts of places along the chain. The NYT article seems to be making political hay out of the fact that there happen to be some additional points along that chain for overseas military ballots.
Ballots could be compromised by the electioneers at your local library/fire station/place of baloting-- that was never the real check. The check on ballot tampering has always been:
- statistical anomalies to spot possible tampering
- ballot counting to verify/disprove tampering.
This may seem simpleton, but it's how things have been done for the length of the republic. I don't see how adding some more stages (with the same checks at each stage) would fundamentally alter that-- unless you're a newspaper trying to raise the spectre of a rigged election 2 months before voting starts...
davejenkins.com |
There are many, many situations of this nature. See Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government
you done good my boy... you done good.
the problem is not only that secrecy can be breached, but that it will be breached. After all you have to waive your right to a secret ballot.
As if this wasn't bad enough already (though you might make an argument that it is justifiable in some extreme situations), the company that handles the ballots is far from non-partisan and there is no way to independently verify that the ballots are handled the way they should be handled.
Finally, as an outside observer, I just don't get it that after the distater of the last presidential election in Florida, that also involved problems with absentee ballots from military personal, btw., things like these are still possible in the US. I get the feeling, that either the US can't get its act together (though I think that is very unlikely), or those in charge don't want to get their act together.
US government so far didn't give any sign it would prosecute people based on their vote. The real problems, in the order importance are lack of choice (Republican vs Democratic, what if I disagree with both on different issues?), people not voting and only then mistakes in vote count.
Human rights violations with 9/11 as an excuse raise a vague concern that someday a "pro-terrorist" vote will become an issue. But as of today, anyone who is affraid of being punished for voting Democratic or Republican probably should be isolated from society because of mental instability.
All big companies donate large amounts of money to both political parties. It's too late to do any research on this particular one, but I would be surprised if they donated money to Republicans without donating to Democrats.
Geez, take your tinfoil hat off...
This begs the question why is voting anonymous anyway? Am i somehow under threat if i vote for kerry or bush or even the communist party candidate and gasp someone finds out :o ....it seems to me that if it was simply published then we could actaully see if the sytem is fucked....ie hanging chads and all that. I think our democracy is more threatened by the possibity of faulty even intentional voteing fraud created having an anonymous voting proceedure then some proceeved unknown risk of having each vote stamped with a name.
stendec@gmail.com
Those of us who take an interest in the state of the US watch in sorrow and some concern at the rate at which your cherished rights and freedoms are being stamped on by this administration. Bush only got in after some very suspicious vote counting. The Republicans aren't too bothered what it takes to keep him there.
The NYT editorial board sez: Omega Technologies is not an acceptable choice to run the program. Its chief executive, Patricia Williams, has donated $6,600 in this election cycle to the National Republican Congressional Committee, and serves on the committee's Business Advisory Council.
.. not the people.
Is it really so terrible to give money to a political campaign? At least one member of the family which owns the New York Times (Dr. Judith P. Sulzberger) donated $2000 to the John Kerry campaign, $5000 to 'Victory Campaign 2004', and $20000 to the Democrat National Committee.
Does this mean I can no longer trust the New York Times to treat facts with a modicum of fairness? Is it inappropriate for me to get factual information about political campaigns from them?
The NYT editors should quit their whining. Almost every person in the US has some political preferences, whether he or she has given money to a campaign or not. Having a strong political preference does not automatically make a person untrustworthy.
They should stick to criticizing the process here
First of all, it's kind of lame that the company would not give any information about its security procedures, while another source (it would seem) was readily available that details the whole thing.
Second, the Business Advisory Council is (in my opinion) a total crock of shit. I used to work for a company whose CEO won the Business Advisory Council's "Businessman of the Year" award. Let me tell you, the award is (in my opinion) pretty much given to people who donate large sums to the party. Oh did I mention that the company mentioned above is now under the control of a receiver, and is also under investigation by the IRS Criminal Investigvation Division? Oh, did I mention the grand jury preceedings? But I digress......
Remember, you cannot trust anyone, the whole damned system is corrupt, and all parts biased, one way or the other. (The "in my opinion" statements above are merely a CYA thing)
bash: rtfm: command not found
That wouldn't put a huge dent in the military, which tends to vote republican 80+ percent of the time (I saw a statistic at one time that showed military officers voted republican 8 to 1 over democrat... Here's an article about the Duke Study ).
I'd have to say from my own experience (former military officer talking here) that the percentage is probably higher than they think. I can count on one hand the number of real liberal democrats I encountered during all my years in the military.
Bush is respected by almost all the current and former US military personnel I know, in distinct contrast to Bill Clinton. When I was in the service, many officers and enlisted so despised Clinton that they refused to display any certificates, awards, decorations, citations, etc with his signature on them. Despite the prohibition on using "contemptuous words" against the commander-in-chief and elected officials, most guys were (privately) very frank about how they felt... The level of enmity was really remarkable.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
qoute: :qoute
Those of us who take an interest in the state of the US watch in sorrow and some concern at the rate at which your cherished rights and freedoms are being stamped on by this administration. Bush only got in after some very suspicious vote counting. The Republicans aren't too bothered what it takes to keep him there.
So much for your charished freedoms. People who don't know jack shit are almost as bad as corrupted polititions.
Your probably one of those guys that say: "Oh, look the sumpreme court elected the president".
numbnut.
First off you might as well work for facts:
1. The democrats were the ones to start the lawsuit bullshit.
2. they were recounted 3 times and each time George Bush won by a slightly larger margin, proving that the error in counting was on the outgoing Vice President's side. But they didn't count because they were not 'official' from the standpoint of the democrat lawsuites.
3. The supreme court ruled that they didn't have the power to over turn Florida's own courts in this matter, not that George Bush won.
And all that is completely and totally fucking pointless BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT IS NOT ELECTED BY POPULAR VOTE AND NEVER WAS AT ANY FREAKING TIME IN US HISTORY.
This is how it works:
1. Congress, the senate and house, is elected by popular vote.
2. The Executative branch, the president, is elected by state governments thru the electoral college.
3. The judicial branch, the supreme court + friends, are appointed into office.
This is what is known as "division of powers", each branch has a different purpose and different point of view on any matter.
What is the fucking point to having 2 branches of government that are suppose to appose each other, but were elected in the same fucking way?!!!
Popular vote = people who decide legislature, who decide what taxes to get and what to do with the taxes. For example: George Bush is not, or never was, repsonsable for the tax cut for example. That's the congresses job. He sponsored the legislation and didn't veto it, but you can sponsor legislation yourself. The difference is that you can't veto it.
state vote = The government's job is dealing with interstate commerce and affairs. Were inter-state means affairs BETWEEEN states. It also deals with international affairs and the US needed a figurehead in times of peace and a leader in times of war. That's what the president does.
That's why he is elected by the states. You elect your state government the state governments together elect the president.
Appointed = The judges are professionals in the classic sense like European governments were. The saw the value of detactment. And neither are judges subject to popular vote, or political pressure, like the congress and the president are respectively.
The only reason why it SEEMS like the president is elected by popular vote is because most state governments ARE PUSSIES AND SCARED OF WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK.
So they do the popular vote to get what most people want in order to maximize the chances of their re-election and just have the electorals choose the same.
So it's FLORIDA that elected the President NOT the popular vote or mis-counts or anything. You beef is with them, not the Supreme court OR the republicans OR the democrates.
But politions try to make political hay out of every opertunity and 70% of people in mass media are registered democrates, so it's not suprising that people have no real clue what is going on.
but the only thing I can't figure out is AM I THE ONLY PERSON THAT PAID ATTENTION IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND CURRENT EVENTS CLASSES????????????
It seems that most people are wholy ignorant of the most basic concepts of our government, and yet bitch about loosing freedoms.
Hell I bet you think that gun control is a good idea...
The louder you yell about your freedom, the more I can hear your chains rattle.
You chains are manipulations allowed by your own ignorance of what is going on around you, in this case.
good post, too bad I have no modpoints.
I know several people in the military, who were absolutely enraged with the last election because their absentee ballots were'nt counted. See this for example. They were far more angry that their vote was usurped, then they were concerned about someone seeing their vote.
enough of you fools are voting for him anyway (according to a time poll)
you really get the "democracy" you deserve, the same one that brings you torture, poverty, corporate corruption, war, lies etc etc
so look forward to the draft, more war, more corruption, more human rights abuses, more lies
it seems you are fine with whats happen and you would like more of the same
USA voted the second greatest threat to world peace
Yep. Sometimes I figure I miss out on not being registered to slashdot. But then I see what type of thing gets modded up, and then I realise I miss out on nothing.
i calsystem/a /electcollege.htm
And here is a link for people to lazy to do research:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepolit
Everytime a story like this is posted I'm scared by the way people react.
Obviously without even bothering to read the article people tell us that everyone who is concerned about these kinds of things should take of their tin foil heads.
They tell us that 6 000$ isn't much, as if this was the point.
And they immediately start the old Democrats vs. Republicans game. For every instance of republican foul play I will post at least one instance of the democrats doing something wrong. As if it did matter who deprived voter of their basic rights.
Now take into account that this story is not the only reason to be concerned (Diebold anyone?) and what has hapend in Florida during the last Presidential election and it should be clear to anyone that there is reason to be concerned.
The moment the outcome of an election is decided not by the people voting but by judges who decide if counting the votes one side wants to count or counting the votes the other side wants to count something is wrong and needs fixing. Seeing what is happening lately in the US this situation seems far from solved, on the contrary seems to get worse.
What will happen to a country whose citizens don't seem to be concerned if their most basic right is undermined?
The idiot that sees this as a troll has a serious humor deficiency!
Ahhh America. The land of the free is becoming more and more like a communist government everyday.
We are all screwed if that fool GW gets back in. The whole world will go to shit! More wars, more oppression and more abuse of human rights.
Yep, I'm sure his god loves him for that.
Let's try not to make too much of the fact that organizations outside the gov't having to do with voting (Diebold, Omega, et al) support conservatives moreso than liberals, politically.
This is largely because the right is much more pro-business and -capitalism than the left, who are typically seen to increasingly resent the wealth builders and creators with the more wealth they build and create.
If some organization seemed intent on taxing and regulating me out of business, I probably wouldn't support them much, either.
What party a business supports in a moot point, regardless. If someone is paranoid enough to have visions of conspiracy by right-supporting businesses, then the same untrustworthiness must therefore be assumed about all left-supporing organizations as well. While I don't understand paranoia all that well, maybe in the minds of those so afflicted, these two opposing conspiracies would cancel each other out...?
There's no substitute for thinking.
Excellent research. Mod parent up!!
--
24 wars since WW2: Creating fear so rich people can profit.
When you don't have choice, for example, in the way that vote is taken and passed, then that is something to worry about. Nobody forces you to buy the NYT or to watch Fox.
I live overseas and inside the envelope there is a letter that says you have the option to fax in your ballot, but you must sign the waver about the secret ballot. BUT you can mail the thing in and you have the secret option.
It's quite obvious that it's not some crazy conspiracy, if you fax in you must also incude your voter card (or else someone will do a DoS attack) The mail in letter is unique and could be easly identified as a fourge.
hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
Now go and read a book.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
If these incompetants don't get replaced, then those who hired them may have to have their sources of lobbying money examined - and criminal charges of bribery applied where appropriate.
Democrats here in St. Louis are trying to get the polls open early just so they can drive or bus enough people to the polls to be sure they win state offices.
s f/ missouristatenews/story/AA1C7029FE88F69886256F0200 6521BB?OpenDocument&Headline=Judge+rules+for+state +in+early+voting+case&highlight=2%2C2%2Cday%2Celec tions
The thing you don't understand is that here and in California where I used to live there are MANY cases of Democrats paying voters to come in. But I guess in your zeal, you fail to notice all of this.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.n
You're so full of shit about republicans. Incredible.
It seems that most people are wholy ignorant of the most basic concepts of our government, and yet bitch about loosing freedoms.
:)
Some of us are better at some things than others, I guess.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
I suppose if the US wants democracy they should outsource the handling of elections to India- the world's largest democracy.
= UTF-8&q=malaysia+democracy">"lack" of democracy</a> in my country. But they're not really bothering about ensuring democracy in the US are they?
India had their elections this year, the then incumbent lost, but there were no significant riots - so I figure most Indians were satisfied with the results. Otherwise I'm sure heads will literally roll.
In contrast the US isn't doing too well- electronic voting machines designed for rigging. Negative vote counts, more votes than voters, etc. I mean even Saddam was careful to keep his votes between 0% and 100%.
Personally I think the US should execute all those involved in compromising the US elections. Execute them all for treason.
If the voting machines in the US are so easily tampered with, what sort of democracy does the US have? The irony is the Western Press likes to play up the <a href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie
I'd have thought that ensuring democracy in the world's most powerful nation would be quite important.
In my country, though the votes aren't anonymous, it seems we've got a better system. You vote marking an X on the desired box next to the candidate on piece of paper. The paper is inserted into a sealed ballot box. Once voting is done, the ballot boxes are all escorted by representatives of the opposition, observers, election officials to the counting stations. The boxes are opened and votes are counted by hand in clear view of everyone - the opposition included (if they bother to attend). The representatives get to see which box the X is in, or if some idiot voter doesn't know how to vote, or intentionally spoilt the vote.
Sure you can tamper with votes, but widescale tampering isn't going to be that easy.
In contrast, the US intended systems make tampering trivial.
Anonymous voting is not so important in civilized[1] countries.
Someone mentioned about the danger of bosses knowing who you vote for. Maybe in the US it's common for bosses/etc to care about who you vote for and so given the chance they'll go take the trouble to look up the votes of their employees.
But over here, most bosses seem to care a lot more about the bottomline. Maybe if you spend a lot of time sticking up political posters etc, the boss might be a bit concerned - coz it may affect your performance and thus the bottomline.
[1] Then again maybe it's too much to expect of the US?
Mahatma Gandhi when asked: "What do you think of Western Civilization?", he promptly replied: "I think it would be a good idea".
BBC investigative reporter Greg Palast is one person who originally turned up the bogus use of military absentee ballots in Florida in the 2000 election.
You'd think they would have straightened it out, but as this story reports the absentee process in Florida if anything has gotten worse!
Now, four years later and the process is not fixed, and is arguably worse than ever. Accidental or planned?
...one part of the employment market that is unquestionably doing a brisk business. Turnover is low, always looking for new employees, wages are low, too bad civilian employers can't work like that. Maybe if they paid to feed clothe and dress us, oh wait that's why they pay us.
I didn't remember reading anywhere that anonymous voting is a right.
In fact, didn't it used to be that people would walk into a voting booth, announce their name and address, and who they voted for? The secret ballot has been a fairly recent thing in politics.
As for me, I don't have a problem announcing who I vote for. After all, it is the one thing that I do that affects the country the most, why would I want to hide when I do it? Who should I be afraid of?
WHOA right there buddy. First of all, you spelled TECHNOLOGY wrong. So I was not surprised when I got a "no results found" when I went to your "reference."
? type=io&c ycle=04&criteria=OMEGA+TECHNOLOGIES+INC
So I corrected the spelling... Still no result.
http://www.campaignmoney.com/finance.asp
And try searching these variations:
OMEGA
OMEGA TECH
OMEGA TECHNOLOGIES INC
OMEGA TECHNOLOGIES
The only result that turned up anything was "OMEGA TECNOLOGIES," even though the search blatantly says "(enter any part of the employer name or occupation)."
So I smell a rat... Or at least a poorly written database. Anyone find REAL info?
So .. um .. people can't support a political party and still do their job without prejudice? I'd like to believe that at least some of us have a shred of decency. I'm curious that if intead this company's CEO had donated money to the Green Party would it have made front page news? Probably if perhaps the tinfoil hat has a hole in it ....
So a service that was made to get more republican votes (see comments on percentage of u.s. army pro republican voters) enables me to vote against Bush [sic].
Did you even read his post? He mentioned the spelling discrepancy. If you're going to discount an entire database because of a spelling error, more power to you. And if you want to discount his link, consider that it works if you search for the "/PRES" portion. It's not like he made it up.
My guess is that the misspelling is due to a too-short database field. "OMEGA TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED" is length 31, and while it would be surprising for the database to have a length 30 field (it's kind of short), it does explain the misspelling. (My guess is that someone clueless entered the data: it would be far better to drop the last "D" to make the word "TECHNOLOGIES" searchable.) I could be wrong, but it's a simpler explanation than a conspiracy theory. And a cursory test of their database suggests it has some records that have been validated against other sources, so it's not completely made up data. (I'm not going to provide specifics because this is fairly easy for you to do with someone you know.) And in case you think that someone made up a corporation named "OMEGA TECNOLOGIES" and donated money to the RNC, the listed donor (Williams, Patricia A) is apparently affiliated with "Omega Technologies". Any kind of conspiracy theory seems a bit farfetched...
From Omega careers page: Web Developer Job Description: Web developer will be responsible for the design, development and testing of cutting edge Internet based solutions. The employee will assist in needs analysis, and planning and development of implementation strategies. The development will also require evaluation of third party products/component technologies, on-site testing and installations, and testing and debugging of applications. Knowledge of C++ and Cold Fusion
Can't moderate this discussion because of my own comments. Please mod parent down, he can't have read his parent post or he's just a troll. See the other reply to my parents post, mod it up.c %20ycle=04&criteria=OMEGA+TECNOLOGIES+INCORPORATED %2F
The "reference" (the url) of grandparent doesn't work, probably it's cut, but this one works:
http://www.campaignmoney.com/finance.asp?type=io&
Anyone can explain that quote, and who that guy was?
I found info about Jury Nullification on this page, but that's about it.
There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt
thanks!
Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
Let me rephrase that... newspapers are a fundamental part of the political process, so of course they have an editorial line. But with regard to facts, they are also subject to a public fact-checking process, so any newspaper or other news source which constantly distorts the facts will quickly become known as such and lose credibility.
Omega Technologies are not subject to public fact-checking, so they should not be used.
Historically the State and Church have been Conservative powers. If you look at Latin American history, the State has always had a strong support for a strong military. When you have a State that redistributes it's peoples money back to the people, it's the military who's the beneficiary, second to those in power.
During the 80's, Latin America felt the ripple of the Catholic Church's new doctrine, Vatican II. In which the the Church is supposed to be for the benefit of it's people, not those in power. This broke the natural link between Conservative powers. This new doctrine allowed idealist clergy to really attempt to help their people.
Sadly, empowering the people is not in the favor of the State. Therefore, the Church was targeted for elimination, along with teachers, artists, and intellectuals, all under the pretext of being the enemy: Communists.
Where was I going with this? The State and the Military are both Conservative powers. But the Military takes back seat to the State in "democratic" countries, and the driver seat in fascist countries.
General Santa Ana of Mexico was ousted by the military, because he was unable to continue paying them. World leaders are in a pinch, support your people, or support your military.
http://www.aladdin.com (Characteristics of Fascism).
Why is voting anonymous anyway?
Because the human race is capable of great and cunning evil, you oh so sheltered youngster.
Read a little history. Start anywhere... Here for example:
www.jimcrowhistory.org/history/overview.htm
"Disfranchisement: The move by militant southern Democrats in 1890 to systematically and legally end black voting. To circumvent the 15th Amendment--which explicitly forbids the denial of votes on "account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude"--white racists rewrote state constitutions by adopting complex voting requirements that--without mentioning race--disfranchised black voters. Mississippi set the pace in 1890 with a set of disfranchisement measures that required proof of residency and payment of a poll tax, no criminal convictions, and literacy tests, which whites were allowed to pass if they understood the State Constitution when read to them. Louisiana introduced the grandfather clause in 1898, which stated that only men who had been eligible to vote before 1867, or whose father or grandfather had been eligible to vote prior to that year, were qualified to vote. This obviously excluded virtually all black males. Some states also passed the so-called "white primary," which limited voting in the Democratic Party primaries to whites. These measures taken together eliminated the black vote from southern politics."
Yeah, you tried real hard there, buddy. First, you did read the part of my post where I pointed out that the name of the company is mis-spelled in the database - every time. Second, you didn't notice that /. added a space to the link, did you? So you say I lie? No, I don't lie - you just don't READ!!!
And yet, when he does something like determine that removing political oppression in the Middle East is the best way to make the world safe from the potential of terrorists with WMD, it's the hard-core anti-W folks screaming "it's all for oil" or "it's a neo-con [read: Jewish] consipiracy to protect Israel" or "Bush lied".
I guess they must be seeing a different John Kerry than I am. Which wouldn't be surprising. How many John Kerrys are there, anyway? We know that there's at least two...
Thanks. The reference works fine, as long as you account for the fact that /. adds a space to long references. Try this one, which is what I typed (without the interpolated space due to /code). There are a huge number of trolls in any political discussion, of every persuasion. I find it interesting, though, that I was accused of lying by someone who obviously didn't read my post all the way through.
And then acted like it was really true.
First, the technical aspects of this.. the voter secrecy parts, should be taken seriously.
Secondly.. it's kind of funny to hear complaints about them not being "non partisan".
Just about every American I know feels strongly about one party or the other, and given how US politics work, that makes sense.
Are we trying to say that those who are making voting systems and services should not be entitled to political opinion?
Of course not...
What they SHOULD have to do is keep their services as transparent and watertight as possible, open to external scrutiny, so nobody can scream "election fraud"
This story sucks - all it does is make us go against each other - The story had barely enough content to make it a Slashdot story at all. Please refrain from posting this crap in the future or I will trade in my Karma and leave.....
And of course, any time someone brings up the need to verify identity for voting in the US, it's the Democrats that squawk "racism". That squawking would have nothing to do with places like heavily-Democrat Philly, where 99% of all voters are registered, and 95%+ of those vote Democrat. Naah, no vote fraud there.
Hey, I've got this huge bridge near the south end of Manhattan that I really don't have a place to put. It's for sale - cheap.
That's right! Progressive Conservative! And they're our equivalent to the Republican party here in Canada.
Why do people fall for that "they donated $6k" line every time? Do you think politicans are that cheap? No, its hundreds of thousands of dollars but its not given out directly. Its contracts after they are elected for doing things to help them get elected.
Honestly, do you think $6k will get you a minute of anyone's time? That's just reported so numbskulls will have something to bitch about.
Who is this ambigous "everyone" you refer to? I know it may come as a shock, but "everyone" encompasses more then your immedate household.
I apologize for the lies segment. I'll admit an oversight on my part. I was trolling, and I see that now. To make up for it, I will present what little logic I can form while mildly hung over. (The error is consistent across multiple sites, so it's likely whats-her-face fucked up, not them)
6 Grand is a lot, but not much from a CEO of a company. I give 500 to the GOP every year. I earn less than 40 grand, so 6 grand is not an unreasonable level of a personal contribution from an exec earning 5, 10 times what I make.
Second, check some other sites for campain donations.
Open Secrets.org has a detailed comparison of many actual company donations. It also has stats to show which party many organizations fall partial to. (an ironic sidenote: even though slashdot typically hates the RIAA/MPAA, and the general political preference is democrat, the RIAA/MPAA give more money to dems than republicans. A LOT more)
Almost any company is biased one way or another (wheter or not they actually donate money). So the only logical solution i can see is either open-source the app or have the NSA do it. But we don't all trust the NSA do we?
Let's not forget that many, if not most of those soldiers already have many good reasons to be furiously angry at Bush and his administration. I think I can safely speculate on what their vote would've been.
quote: "So I smell a rat..." And I see a moron. The misspelling was clearly referenced in his post. Another typical right wing jackoff getting his panties in a bunch without bothering to even READ what the other person said. How typical.
The only study quoted i.e. the "Duke Study" "Over the past quarter century, elite military officers have largely abandoned political neutrality and have become partisan Republicans," the study announced, noting that 64 percent of those surveyed identified themselves that way." All other numbers quoted in the article are opinions of people in the military that probably is more favorable to their own stereotype.
64% is a far cry from 80%, also please not this study was done before Iraq, stop-loss orders, soldiers not being paid on time, being on duty for longer tours than usual, veterans benefits being cut aswell as hazard pay and reserves/national guard being used like regular troops.
I'd imagine that this development may sway some voters.
"Nimis exaltatus rex sedet in vertice - caveat ruinam!"
FOX MULDER
You saw it cross the road with your own eyes! How many more chickens have to cross before you believe it?
everyone = anyone who doesn't believe the fox news party line.
A radio maverick jumps to internet only. The Future of Rock n Roll
Most military votes go Republican. Sorry, but it's the truth. In the volunteer military, 90% or more of the vote will go Republican. Why is this "interesting"? There are a large number of people in Iraq and elsewhere that want to vote. And they DON'T want to vote for lazy John Kerry or the shyster John Edwards.
Maybe this is a chance to complain about voting in general?
We all know that the next election will be fought and complained and whined in the courtrooms. Just like the last election, the left is going to scream bloody murder. People too stupid to vote will whine that they can't figure out a punch card. They'll make claims that they were disenfranchised. If you are too stupid to vote, you're too stupid to have your vote count. Get some help, deal with it, move on.
No partisan interest here. It's been going on a long time: 24 wars since WW2. Creating fear so rich people can profit.
However, you seem to say that the 3 movies and 35 recently published books in this article are all wrong, even though they written by all kinds of people, Republicans, Democrats, generals, former government leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, political commentators, editorial writers, environmental organizations, and members of the public: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government.
Name ONE statement that is in error. I'll investigate (again), and if you are correct, I will change it.
Most people don't know that the situation in Iraq began in the 50's, when hidden elements of the U.S. government overthrew a democratically elected president of Iran (Mossadegh) because he wanted to reduce the profits of U.S. and British oil companies doing business in Iran. The U.S. government supported a very weak man, the Shah of Iran, who became very violent toward his own citizens. Eventually, people in Iran overthrew the Shah. The U.S. government's actions de-stabilized the country and encouraged the violence that came after. The U.S. government supported Iraq against Iran, supplying weapons to Saddam Hussein at a very high profit for the rich owners of U.S. weapons companies. The Bush family has long owned part of a company that owns weapons companies. Cheney was head of Halliburton, a company that profits when there is war, especially since Halliburton was able to arrange a secret, no competitive bid contract.
What do you say about that? Is the university that hosts the documents all wrong?
Obviously, there is too much material for any one article. Should I not discuss the corruption of today because there was corruption in the past?
Drop this shit like a hot potato. That itself is reason enough to have less faith in them...
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I'm glad you apologized for that comment, it took guts - and the brains to realize that you were mistaken (at least in this case).
Yes, the RIAA/MPAA give a lot more money to the Democrats - which I find disgusting on the part of the Democrats. Both parties have their favorite ways of violating our rights - that's why, even though (unlike you) I abhor guns, and even think that some guns should be regulated in some ways, I agree with you (from your other postings) that the 2nd Amendment was a very important thing to keep in the Constitution - when the bootjacks come, whether they call themselves Democrats or Republicans, whether it's in 100 years or a 1000 - it'll happen eventually, every great Republic eventually falls to the tyrants, as Polybius and Thucydides and Tacitus teach us - at least there should be some way of resisting them.
I did finally remember the OpenSecrets URL before seeing your posting, and saw the same thing you did. As I'm sure you realize, the OpenSecrets site is very non-partisan, and is professionally done (the board are both Democrats and Republicans). Either the FEC database is to blame, or Ms. Williams is. Now, if Ms. Williams is, either she did it out of ignorance of the name of her own company (which would surprise me; the CEO of my company gets annoyed when people punctuate the name improperly), or she did it to make her affiliation harder to find. We'll be nice and assume that it was the FEC's fault.
The point here isn't that one company is donating some money to one party - its that there's a pattern of companies associated with elections oversight being affiliated with the Republican Party, and there were a LOT of irregularities in Florida - that's what's bothering Democrats. The reason the Democrats (wrongly, in my opinion) challenged those military absentee ballots is because there was some minor evidence of absentee ballots being tampered with by Republican officials, say one or two of them. Bad reason to toss out large numbers of absentee ballots, especially from folks who are risking their lives defending our country, but no different in detail, aside from the obvious emotional distinction, from Republicans having folks stricken from the rolls, supposedly for no longer being residents, whom they know to be active Democrats (I have independent reason to believe these accusations).
As Cokie Roberts said, though (and she's from a prominent Democratic family), in Florida they don't know how to rig an election properly - in Louisiana, they bury their dead shallow so it's easier to dig them up on election day!!! Election irregularities and corruption have been a multi-partisan problem for a long time. So what I'd do is a. have electronic voting provide human-readable/machine-scannable receipts, so both hand recounts and mechanical recounts can be checked against the electronic voting, and for absentee military ballots, use seals and have officers notarize the seals (rather than using fax machines, etc.) If you've got an officer notarizing a seal, you're no less secret than in many small wards, and you'll be able to do sanity checks on the absentee ballot. But, not having been in the military, I don't know how feasible that would be. But certainly I think disenfranchising the military is the ultimate in stupidity - since the most important decisions the President is going to make will effect them directly, they're the ones whose votes are most important to protect. I don't understand why they're all gung-ho to re-elect this administration, since I think an administration capable of a more balanced and internationalist foreign policy would better serve their interests (in other words, one like the previous two administrations, both Clinton and Bush 41), but that's another story.
This is such weak data:
Omega President and CEO Patricia Williams has donated $6,600 in this election cycle to the National Republican Congressional Committee and is a member of its Business Advisory Council.
A $6600 donation is a drop in the bucket. A CEO membership on the BAC isn't out of line.
Look, I don't disagree that graft is out of control in our nation, but can the news sources please start providing us with a little bit better social network or money trail maps? It's nothing short of dairy farm stinking suspicious that network and finance maps are given only the weakest cursory mentions.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Okay, so Patricia Williams President and CEO of Omega Technologies is a republican supporter. Are you saying that this makes her a criminal willing to commit voter fraud? I think this is a huge leap. First she would have to decide that democracy is ridiculous and the people should not pick their leader, that the leader should be chosen for the people. Secondly, she would have to decide to risk going to jail and having her business destroyed to disenfranchise soldiers that are dying for this country. Thirdly, she would have to somehow do this without any of the people who work for Omega Technologies blowing the whistle. I don't know Patricia Williams. Do you have any proof she is willing to commit the criminal acts that are being assumed she will commit?
The way I see it, Bush ran this war incompetently and negligently and he should be held accountable for the deaths the U.S. servicemen and women. He should be facing 900+ counts of manslaughter due to criminal negligence.
Cheney pushed Bush into a war without significant world support and with insuffient troop levels to secure Iraq. That he did this with a clear conflict of interest -- the company he was CEO of and that made him hundreds of millions in 10 years -- received its payback - billions in contracts. This is _criminal_ conflict of interest and he should be facing the same charges as Bush.
If you have resources, then get your legal ducks in a row and go arrest them. But while you're at it you should be bipartisan.
Richard Clarke revealed that Clinton did not respond to the Cole bombing because he felt that a response would look politically motivated as he was in the middle of the Lewinsky scandal. With his ability to act according to his oath comprimized, he should have resigned. He did not resign, did not repond to the terrorist attacks, and so should be arrested, tried, and impisoned for this crime.
Sorry, that article is nothing more than a "he stole the election" rehash.
Did you actually read the article? The story is about an election official in Florida counting/rigging her own election, and that election was held in 2004.
The only information in the article relating to the 2000 election was to cite that the election official was controversial during that election too.
Informative? Only if your of the tin foil hat group.
Let's see. A story by an award-winning investigative British reporter, the same reporter who uncovered the "use databases to keep 90K+ Floridians from voting" in the 2000 election (thus, he has a deep background in US and Florida elections), writes a story about election corruption still going on in Florida in 2004. Yet that somehow is not informative and is the stuff of a "tin foil hat group?"
Your bias is so strong it's illogical.
First rule : If its not a commoningly know link, ie a news source many people know of, trust, or etc then its probably a hack site.
The source cited was a news aggregator site. They simply reprinted the article. See the other posts of this article where I cited the same article on Congress.org and the journalist's own web site.
[see note above]
Fox party line? Is that some sort of 900 #?
I don't want them in jail. I just want someone new in office.
You missed the point. She's operating under conflict of interest. The money and her position with the Republicans is only supporting evidence.
--
Bush's education improvements were fraud
How otherwise is King George gonna get his fightin' men n' wimmin ta vote fer him, 'cuz we dun turned the corner. :)
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Why didn't a Kerry supporter donate $7000 to get the job?
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
I'm just a Brit - Watching from overseas, looking at the US through the eyes of the internet. Of course, this means I don't see it through the eyes of big-media, aside from prehaps the BBC once in a while, and if I remember - the channel 4 news occasionally.
So from where I am looking, I see peoples rights being taken away daily, contradictions in every-day aspects of American life, conflicts of interest and unacceptable terms lain down in everything from voting to laws. And I have to ask - why is nothing being done about it?
Really... I'm not trolling, or trying to 'diss' America. I used to love the idea of coming over to live in America, it was one of my childhood dreams - land of the free - these days, I'm far too concerned about the state of democracy over there. And yet I see almost nothing being done about it.
Over here, if we stood up on the news and said 'There is a clear conflict of interest, due to the link between the companys doing the voting machines, and the current prime minister' - I honestly believe something would be done about it, and very quickly. And for people to be arrested for simply protesting, on the scale/obsurdity that appears to be happening over there, would provoke outrage, and instant responses - along with extreme critisism, both from the media, and the opposition party.
So how to finish up this post? Good question - It's just as much a rant on 'why is america not doing something?' as 'why is this happening in the first place?', and voting is only a small part of what seems to be an institutional corruption. I can only hope that at some point in the future, a president will have the foresight to look forward and put in place, restrictions and clauses to further protect the American people. Your constitution is apparently no longer up to the job, and your democracy has been truely corrupted. (This is not a troll/flamebait post)
...but that's nothing to be embarrassed about, ignorance is curable.
The "McCarthy witch hunts" were NOT witch hunts (read the end). McCarthy's basic argument was "should we have people who are communists (many self admitted) in sensitive positions within our government?"
He was not only right, but underestimated the extent of soviet infiltration, as the release of the Venona Project transcripts now reveal (summary here).
Now go and read a book.
A sad trend in the US for the last couple of decades has been that of "those who know better, do nothing". Or more recently, "those who know better do nothing but bitch on the internet"
Obviously, voting is something that should be left in the hands of the people and not some corporation with who knows what agenda.
But where are the volunteers to step up and implement and open and robust voting system?
Of all the people here who bitch about "our rights being thrown away" - how many of them have even volunteered to work in a polling place, much less talked with their state's election board members?
The boards know that all these systems SUCK! But nobody has tried to give them a reasonable alternative.
Rather than bitch on the internet, why doesn't anyone here, with the expertise and obsessive desire for openness, do something about it?
Our rights are being thrown away because you're too lazy to get out of your chair and stop it. Join an activist organization. Lobby your congresspeople. Make a nuisance of yourself with them!
Moaning on the internet does nothing.
-
Funny someone would say the words "non-partisan or bipartisan" about the New York Times.
They are also far from transparent or accountable. In fact, their ombudsman just quit, after a column stating that the NYT is so far to the left of "normal america" that it's ridiculous. He basically said the SF Chronicle(!) is more balanced than the NYT, which is a stretch.
from the 'manual': Secrecy Waiver - Statement that must be signed by a voter who returns a ballot electronically.
o /milart icles/blsmartcards.htm
This is ABSURD. EVERY Soldier/Airman/Seaman/Marine has a military ID, with a chip in it, that stores a 128bit public key encription pair (ie: much like PGP/GPG) WHY aren't we using these?
Using PKI, each ballot is encrypted with a checksum, maintaining integrity, duplicates are not possible because identity can be connected with the ballot, as they are accumulated. When all PKI-Eballots are collected, they can be decrypted, discarding identity information during the decryption.
It's still a process, and still requires a third party with computers and software which might set some people off... but considering that modern military ID cards included the means for encryption, it's insane to be FAXING around ballots...
look here.
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf
Some rather entertaining quotes from the sites you linked: ...(The Abu Nidal Organization) relocated to Iraq in December 1998, where the group maintains a presence.
Has not staged a major attack against Western targets since the late 1980s.
Sounds like a definite clear and present danger to the security and welfare of the United States today. Oh yeah.
IMO, it's stretching things quite a bit to use this as a justification for the invasion of Iraq, given that the "War on Terror" doesn't seem to apply to most domestic/regional terrorists in the world, or about states which employ domestic terrorism as a means of control.
Someone found a feature with a popular US electronic voting system (1000 such systems in place), a feature that seems to be _intentionally_ put in for vote tampering and your conclusion is it's just "something that could happen and not something that has happened".
What can I say, but "wow" and "sorry for the interruption, your normal programming will resume shortly".
They clearly haven't already done their duty, so let's take away some of their basic rights. Next, let's strong arm them into not talking when they get home! Wait...
I think he means that there is corruption among Democrats today, just as there is among Republicans, and both should be covered. I understand that the Republicans are currently running the show, and therefore it seems natural to focus on them, but in the interests of your site being taken more seriously, you may want to include information about the corruption on both sides of the aisle. A bit more like how http://www.factcheck.org covers both sides.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Why does it surprize anyone that large businesses usually like the Republican Party better? They usually want less restrictions on business and lower taxes. People should know by now just about any large business like that will be more Republican leaning.
Creative Demolition
I agree that the US invaded Iraq for strategic reasons, and to scare other Middle East rulers. I'm not sure if Bush knows this - he may actually believe some of the rationales he put forward. The papers at Project for a New American Century show that this strategic dimension was brewing long before Bush took any interest in it.
If the US keeps a long-term presence in Iraq, this also reduces US dependence on Israel and Saudi. Having US troops in Saudi was Osama's main grievance. Saudi is "holy"; Iraq is not.
I think the US is also deliberately using Iraq as a "roach motel" for Islamic militants. From what I've read, Saddam had very tight border security, which the US totally disabled, allowing foreign fighters to enter Iraq freely. It's a lot easier to kill these guys in Iraq than to catch them in terrorist actions. I don't know if that counts as "strategic" or "tactical".
is that Clinton opposed the Vietnam War and didn't want to serve.
Bush supported the Vietnam War but didn't want to serve. That's what makes him a Chickenhawk.
duplicate ballots (two ballots had been sent out to many overseas personennel)
ballots postmarked *after* the election
unsigned ballots
I don't see any legitimate reason for any of those to have been counted.
People, even in private companies, dealing in any way with voting should be held to the same standard and limitations.
Russian reporters at the Bush vs Clinton elections found themselves right at home. Two candidates answering no deep questions differing only on minor points. Exactly like the elections in the old ussr.
Read up on some real democracies like they exist in europe where we got every party from left to right. Then come back.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Couldn't they encrypt the ballots first, somehow, and then upon receipt to the proper authorities, they'd be decrypted?
-HobophobE
Nothing laughs forever.
"Russian reporters at the Bush vs Clinton elections found themselves right at home. Two candidates answering no deep questions differing only on minor points. Exactly like the elections in the old ussr."
your argument actually supports capitalism. If our presidental elections are just a show between two nearly identical candidates just like the old USSR then why are we not all in the gulag??? The striking differance between the old USSR and the now USA is capitalism....now i will let you guess which one has the most freedomes, the greatest prosperity and the longest history of stability.
hey i got a book for you to read "Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith
I mean it is almost like an "invisable hand" is retaining our freedoms in the USA.
by the way "Gulag" by Anne Applebaum is a book you should read as well.
stendec@gmail.com
As for Bush, he's certainly responsible for far more members of the American military dying in an unnecessary war that was waged based on a pack of lies. He not only ditched military service himself, but for almost a year after starting the Iraq war he refused to visit the families of soldiers who died in his war. He's been slashing benefits to Veterans, and he even took money that several US veterans had won in a lawsuit against Saddam Hussein for stuff that happened during Desert Storm -- the money should have been paid to the vets and their families, and Bush instead diverted it to the Iraqi "reconstruction." Bush has been slapping the face of American troops and veterans over and over again. It is disgraceful and insulting to those who risk their lives to serve their country. His attempt to paint Kerry as a wimp is a further slap in the face to everyone who has ever served in the military.
Seriously, 6 or 7 grand is pocket change when it comes to corporate type donations. You never hear about the millions donated by and to left wing zealots, but suddenly a few thousand dollars donated legally to a party of someones choosing other than yours is horrible.
Look, I'm not happy with our 2 party system, but quit bitching about freedom and the right to choose, and then scream bloody murder when others don't buy into your choice.
Also, consider this: In the Michael Moore movie Fahrenheit 9/11, George W. Bush can be seen holding hands with a man known to his family as "Bandar Bush", and known in Saudi Arabia as "Prince Bandar". (In Saudi Arabia, it is common for men to hold hands. Doubters: Please, that scene in the movie is taken from network TV footage; no one has contested or questioned it.) Prince Bandar is one of the regime to which Osama bin Laden objects.
George W. Bush had a failing oil company, someone in the Saudi ruling regime bought the company, and Mr. Bush then made a profit. Ask yourself, why would a rich Saudi want to invest in a failing oil company in Texas? The answer is that the Saudis wanted access to top officials in the U.S. government.
So, in this point, Osama bin Laden is correct. I don't agree that violence is the way to resolve this problem, but the U.S. government is preventing needed political change in Saudi Arabia. Think about this. How would you feel if someone from another country was interfering with the U.S. political process?
2) Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda object to the support from the U.S. government for Israeli violence toward Palestinians. I once calculated that the support is about $910 for every Jewish man, woman, and child each year. When you see helicopters firing at Palestinians on the ground, those helicopters came from your tax dollars. Did you intend to get in the middle of a 3,200-year-old conflict (on and off) between the family of Abraham and the surrounding people? Open your billfold right now. What dollars do you see there that you would be willing to give to kill Palestinians you don't know? Yes, there is a serious problem there, but did you intend to get involved? Do you see any advantage for anyone in you getting involved? One famous Israeli government official said that the U.S. government money was like "gasoline on a fire".
So Osama bin Laden is correct in this second complaint, also. Again, I don't agree that violence is the way to resolve this problem, but the U.S. government is, in fact, giving money that Israelis use to buy U.S.-made weapons that are used to kill Arabs. Not surprisingly, Arabs don't like being killed. Not surprisingly, some of them object by becoming violent themselves.
This particular U.S. government corruption works through embezzling. The weapons companies could never arrange a deal to get your tax dollars directly from the U.S. government, the would risk prison; the U.S. government is not that corrupt. Instead, the money goes to the Israeli government first, and back to the weapons manufacturers, who make an easy profit, since the Israelis cannot spend the money elsewhere. If you read the books in the article, Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government, you will see that George W. Bush's family is invested in weapons makers. Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, another company that makes more profit when there is violence. This involvement may make them prefer violent means.
George W. Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, attended a meeting of The Carlyle Group investors on the days around 9/11 that was also attended by a brother of Osama bin Laden. The Carlyle Group is a weapons manufacturer holding company.
That's unprecedented conflict of interest.
(Posting again because Slashdot did not receive all of my comment.)
Thanks very much for the link to FactCheck. I didn't know about it.
Please understand: The corruption in the present administration is by far the worst corruption in the U.S. government ever, apparently, at least. This is why:
Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda have two complaints against the U.S. government:
1) Osama bin Laden says that the U.S. government interferes with politics inside Saudi Arabia, preventing needed changes. I've talked with sons of rich Saudis, whose families benefit from the present regime, and would therefore have every reason to disagree, and they say this is correct. The U.S. government does interfere, and changes are needed.
Also, consider this: In the Michael Moore movie Fahrenheit 9/11, George W. Bush can be seen holding hands with a man known to his family as "Bandar Bush", and known in Saudi Arabia as "Prince Bandar". (In Saudi Arabia, it is common for men to hold hands. Doubters: Please, that scene in the movie is taken from network TV footage; no one has contested or questioned it.) Prince Bandar is one of the regime to which Osama bin Laden objects.
George W. Bush had a failing oil company, someone in the Saudi ruling regime bought the company, and Mr. Bush then made a profit. Ask yourself, why would a rich Saudi want to invest in a failing oil company in Texas? The answer is that the Saudis wanted access to top officials in the U.S. government.
So, in this point, Osama bin Laden is correct. I don't agree that violence is the way to resolve this problem, but the U.S. government is preventing needed political change in Saudi Arabia. Think about this. How would you feel if someone from another country was interfering with the U.S. political process?
2) Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda object to the support from the U.S. government for Israeli violence toward Palestinians. I once calculated that the support is about $910 for every Jewish man, woman, and child each year. When you see helicopters firing at Palestinians on the ground, those helicopters came from your tax dollars. Did you intend to get in the middle of a 3,200-year-old conflict (on and off) between the family of Abraham and the surrounding people? Open your billfold right now. What dollars do you see there that you would be willing to give to kill Palestinians you don't know? Yes, there is a serious problem there, but did you intend to get involved? Do you see any advantage for anyone in you getting involved? One famous Israeli government official said that the U.S. government money was like "gasoline on a fire".
So Osama bin Laden is correct in this second complaint, also. Again, I don't agree that violence is the way to resolve this problem, but the U.S. government is, in fact, giving money that Israelis use to buy U.S.-made weapons that are used to kill Arabs. Not surprisingly, Arabs don't like being killed. Not surprisingly, some of them object by becoming violent themselves.
This particular U.S. government corruption works through embezzling. The weapons companies could never arrange a deal to get your tax dollars directly from the U.S. government, the would risk prison; the U.S. government is not that corrupt. Instead, the money goes to the Israeli government first, and back to the weapons manufacturers, who make an easy profit, since the Israelis cannot spend the money elsewhere. If you read the books in the article, Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government, you will see that George W. Bush's family is invested in weapons makers. Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, another company that makes more profit when there is violence. This involvement may make them prefer violent means.
George W. Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, attended a meeting of
That's one more thing he cannot do while in the US Army
Its because its secret!
Call me and my voicemail! 914-713-6795. (wow, I have the balls to post my voip number on
Bite on that, you mothers! Oh yeah, first fucking post... read it and fucking weep! Down with the GNAA.
Doesn't corruption require malice? Have you ever been to Florida? The people are stupid. Really, really stupid (not the transplants, the home-growns). I'm surprised that many people in Florida can read the names of the people on the ballots.
There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.
"Omega President and CEO Patricia Williams has donated $6,600 in this election cycle to the National Republican Congressional Committee and is a member of its Business Advisory Council."
BFD! I gave almost that much. I would not even consider slanting/altering/or even wanting to know what the votes were. I'll watch it on TV or online like everyone else. the thing is if she gaave that much to thee DNC, it wouldn't eveen be mentioned in the media. In fact, if she gave to DNC, there would be articles saying how wonderful the company is and they have the best product ever! Fuckin' biased media!
That statement alone makes your entire comment completely worthless. Lets see - they allow an attack that kills thousands of people and destroys trillions in capital and infrastructure for what possible reason? And don't give me the oil excuse. I don't care how big your tinfoil hat is no sane person can possible believe that the Bush administration perpetrated 9/11 to simply make some more oil money for their cronies.
"Trying is only the first step towards failure." - Homer
The same with a newspaper and it is even more intersting there as it is possible to suggest linkages by the use of layout. However the bias of newspapers (and many TV channels) is fairly obvious and you can select what you want. The problem is when there is no choice.
Would anyone really feel that handing their vote to an organisation that expresses a bias possibly against their choice is reasonable?
I know - I was one.
A terrorist, you mean?
Let me guess:
If you're American, you either were a soldier (in regards to your reference "state terrorism"), or you were an animal rights activist?
Or you're not American.
What made you give up the trade, by the way?
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
Given all of the problems of the absentee process, why not get rid of it altogether? Take the voting infrastructure sent to public voting places in rural US, and send similar stuff to every overseas base where there are lots of American military & their civilian cohorts (like spouses, families, etc)?
Sure, it'd take the time to fly all of the machines back over to the US, plug in, and send their tally (or however counting is done, bring it here first to prevent foreign observation/hacking), but so what? What's about a day to wait for absentee votes to come in? Let CNN, FNC, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc wait before it's sure.
Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.