[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Thank you for sharing you DIY instructions on how you make your Halloween masks, Mulder. I must say it will be a big improvement for you.

Fail to see the relevance to this thread, however?

Paq

The relevance is the subject matter is about as credible as evidence of alien invasion. The tinfoil hat is for those people like slowcat and most other liberals who can't help but see massive conspiracies in everything!

Intelligent rational people don't see conspiracies in everything. Do you honestly believe the Republicans won the 2004 election because the voting machines were rigged! It always astounds me that some seemingly otherwise rational and intelligent people can give creedence to this nonsense!

[Littlefield]

I think it is pathetic some states cannot hold elections properly .In SC we have used the punch hole ticket and now electronic without the mess they have in Ohio and Florida.

[Mulderator]

BTW--there has always been a risk of rigging and distorting elections--Democrats with the help of unions have been doing did it for years (they actually did steal the 1960 Presidential Electionin contrast to the allegations of Republicans stealing the 2000 and 2004 elections) and only now that they are losing elections is it becoming important to them! If Republicans steal the next 10 elections, we may be close to getting even!

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by Littlefield

I think it is pathetic some states cannot hold elections properly

You see, that's a fallacy--you're state isn't better than any other--you would find these irregularities and problems in every state--only when its close do the problems actually get any attention--there has never been a perfect system. Its just that ever since 2000, the liberals have launched an almost hysterical campaign on voting fraud, which is really ironic since about 99% of the voting fraud in the last 50 years has been carried on by Democrats.

[kaaos]

Originally Posted by Mulder

BTW--there has always been a risk of rigging and distorting elections--Democrats with the help of unions have been doing did it for years (they actually did steal the 1960 Presidential Electionin contrast to the allegations of Republicans stealing the 2000 and 2004 elections) and only now that they are losing elections is it becoming important to them! If Republicans steal the next 10 elections, we may be close to getting even!

In Chicago we have dead people voting for Democrats every election, some of them voted twice.

[Littlefield]

You have to remember JESSIE JACKSON is from Greenville SC so we must be doing something right !

[linskyjack]

Originally Posted by kaaos

In Chicago we have dead people voting for Democrats every election, some of them voted twice.

Would you give us the proof of this in the last election---that was 2004. If you can't then don't make gross generalizations.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

Would you give us the proof of this in the last election---that was 2004. If you can't then don't make gross generalizations.

I think that was tongue in cheek--but the corruption of the elections in Chicago by unions and the mob in favor of Democrats is well documented in the past--I don't think it goes on any more--at least I hope it doesn't--if it did, it probably wouldn't even make the papers!

[linskyjack]

No doubt, both parties have been involved in election rigging. Having said that, there is absolutely no reason why voting machines should leave a paper trail for the purposes of policing against this. Our elections have to be transparent, or there is no hope for this democracy.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

No doubt, both parties have been involved in election rigging. Having said that, there is absolutely no reason why voting machines should leave a paper trail for the purposes of policing against this. Our elections have to be transparent, or there is no hope for this democracy.

Think you meant to say "there is absolutely no reason why voting machines should NOT leave a paper trail for the purposes of policing against this."

If so, I don't necessarily think there has to be a paper trail, although there does have to be a method to audit and verify the accuracy of the process. At some point we will become a primarily paperless society. I also expect at some point we will be able to vote directly from our computers over the Internet.

[Paquadez]

Originally Posted by Mulder

The relevance is the subject matter is about as credible as evidence of alien invasion. The tinfoil hat is for those people like slowcat and most other liberals who can't help but see massive conspiracies in everything!

Intelligent rational people don't see conspiracies in everything. Do you honestly believe the Republicans won the 2004 election because the voting machines were rigged! It always astounds me that some seemingly otherwise rational and intelligent people can give creedence to this nonsense!

Mulder:

Do you in fact actually ever read what other people write, on these boards, before launching into yet another diatribe on your favorite topics?

Where did I mention conspiracy? Where did I refer to specific events?

What I actually espoused, was my concern regarding audit of results. I have been deeply enmeshed in ICT for too many years!

What I do know, absolutely, is that it is far easier to "adjust" results from computer processed readouts, than manually processed systems. And that's what I said.

It is very, very, hard, potentially, without Source Code, for anyone else to dispute certain things. This is precisely why Open Systems are gaining traction with governments and public bodies: since they realise that without universal backwards compatibility, and therefore the ability to simply read stored records from years ago, they can be in breach of their public duty regarding Freedom of Information.

There is, presently, a touching naivity of people believing in what scientists and engineers have called for many years, Magic Black Box Syndrome.

And it's therefore these who are gullible, not those like myself who raise significant and valid concerns.

Paq

[lotuseclat79]

Originally Posted by redivivus

If the democrats win, we will know that the machine was hacked.

Or, so you would like to believe, eh? That result does not constitute the evidence of hacking. Just ask Mulder.

-- Tom

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

Mulder:

Do you in fact actually ever read what other people write, on these boards, before launching into yet another diatribe on your favorite topics?

Where did I mention conspiracy? Where did I refer to specific events?

What I actually espoused, was my concern regarding audit of results. I have been deeply enmeshed in ICT for too many years!

What I do know, absolutely, is that it is far easier to "adjust" results from computer processed readouts, than manually processed systems. And that's what I said.

It is very, very, hard, potentially, without Source Code, for anyone else to dispute certain things. This is precisely why Open Systems are gaining traction with governments and public bodies: since they realise that without universal backwards compatibility, and therefore the ability to simply read stored records from years ago, they can be in breach of their public duty regarding Freedom of Information.

There is, presently, a touching naivity of people believing in what scientists and engineers have called for many years, Magic Black Box Syndrome.

And it's therefore these who are gullible, not those like myself who raise significant and valid concerns.

Paq

I think its a valid concern to make sure ANY election result is not changed by unlawful votes. However, and maybe its because you lived in Europe and havent' been following this, the furor over the voting machines here has been almost an entirely hysterical rant by Democrats over the stealing of the 2004 election. And if Democrats are so concerned with election results, why in California do they resist a law requiring identification when someone goes to a the polls? You'd think people so concerned with the integrity of results would be concerned over unregistered voters voting! . They fight that because they know the vast majority of people voting here that aren't allowed to are illegals and are voting Democrat. And then there was the 2000 election when they were trying to get military votes excluded in Florida (becaue they know they favored Bush) and the fact they wanted to re-count only 3 counties that were heavily democratic--knowing of course that this would add votes for Gore.

So don't preach to me about voting integrity--to me the hypocricy is sickening. When I see Democrats really worried about voting integrity, then I'll take this kind of stuff seriously--I won't hold my breath!

Bottom line this is entirely politically motivated and has nothing to do with voting integrity.

[Mulderator]

Read this:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...3316-5086r.htm

The House yesterday passed legislation that would require voters to show a valid photo identification in federal elections over the overwhelming objections of Democrats who compared the bill to segregation-era measures aimed at disenfranchising Southern blacks.

The Federal Election Integrity Act was approved on a nearly party-line 228-196 vote. Republicans backed the bill 224-3, with three nonvoters; Democrats opposed it 192-4, with five nonvoters. They were joined in opposition by the House's one independent member.

The bill, which faces an uncertain future in the Senate, is part of a Republican effort to complete before the November elections a package of proposals aimed at curbing illegal immigration and its effects on ordinary Americans.

The so-called "Voter ID" bill, aimed at stamping out voter fraud, would require voters in federal elections to provide picture identification by 2008 and provide proof of U.S. citizenship by 2010. It was among the recommendations made last year by the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, headed by former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a Republican.

"Effective voter registration and voter identification are bedrocks of a modern election system," they wrote in their final report.

But Democrats, siding with groups that work on behalf of minorities and illegal aliens, called the bill a "modern-day poll tax" and said it would place an insurmountable burden on voters and infringe upon their voting rights.

Rep. Brian Bilbray, California Republican, countered that the real infringement upon voting rights would be allowing fraudulent votes by the dead or illegal "to cancel out legitimate votes."

"That is the violation of the Voters Rights Act that we have not addressed," he told colleagues before the vote.

Democrats, who have long demanded reforms to the federal voting process, yesterday dismissed Republican concerns about voter fraud.

"Show me the examples of the problem you're trying to solve," demanded Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat who accused Republicans of trying to appeal to the "fear and -- yes, perhaps -- the prejudices of people."

A Republican cited a study by Johns Hopkins University that found 1,500 dead people who had voted in recent elections. Mr. Hoyer belittled the study, saying no criminal convictions for voter fraud had been won in any of those cases.

Mr. Bilbray pointed out that such convictions might be obtained if proper identification were required.

Doesn't it seem a "no-brainer" that we should make sure people showing up to vote actually have the right to vote? The voter ID requirement was offered by a bi-partisan commission including former Democratic president Jimmy Carter and yet the Democrats almost all of them oppose because it would stop illegals from voting (which happens in significant numbers).

So again--don't preach to me about the concerns about voting integrity because Democrats don't have any unless is serves to increase their chances to win! When Democrats take it seriously, I'll take it seriously.

[linskyjack]

Those are California Democrats--not all Democrats. And of course, you should have to present ID before voting.