NO MORE SELF-FLAGELLATION OF WHY WE LOST. ITS THE FRAUD, STUPID!

[TruthIsAll]

Enough of this whining.

And Bill Clinton doesn't speak for me.

[Walt Starr]

1. Please, provide the evidence to support the charges of fraud

Fraud is a very serious charge. Please be so kind as to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

Comparing polls to the election data is enough to spark speculation and examination in a lot of people, and that's okay if you want to enter into such an exercise, but I've seen nothing to support the charge of fraud.

I suggest finding an actual witness to this alleged fraud as witnesses go a long way towards making a convincing argument on a court of law, but keep in mind that all high standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". That's a high bar to overcome.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

6. I've read that thread. There is no evidence of fraud in anything presented

There is speculation and supposition combined with unsubstantiated charges.

Again, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard. I didn;t make those rules, that's the system we live in. Fraud is a serious criminal charge and this is the standard that has been set for proving it. I have more than reasonable doubts and I haven't even seen a defense presentation, so you'd better get cracking because there isn't shit there to prove the charges of fraud!

Time is running out. Under Title 3, Chapter 1, Secgtion 7 of the United States Code, you've got precisely 36 days to even have a hope of affecting the outcome, and less than that depending upon whatever state you plan to bring charges of fraud in because there are Secretary of State offices preparing to certify the results very soon!

Fraud is serious and nobody has made enough of a case for the standards of a grand jury, let alone the case for a real trial.

[AnIndependentTexan]

12. READ Here as well

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/index.php?showtopic=53

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1333866&mesg_id=1333866&page=

[LisaL]

20. This standard you keep talking about-

it's after the criminal goes on trial, only after that the jury find the criminal guilty beyond the reasonable doubt. Yet you expect this iron-clad prove right now.
The investigation haven't even really started yet, and who knows, maybe it will never happen.
But to expect prove beyond the reasonable doubt right now-well, that is just not reasonable.

[AnIndependentTexan]

21. READ it again I just added reason why

First, we have a Republican Nation party connection. We have Diebold's own owner saying that he will dilver the states to Bush. Second we have information on how they did it. Third we have a Cheney connection to e-voting process. Then we have a Media connection that links it all together. Not to metion we have a 2000 connection of it happening the same with Gore!

[Walt Starr]

35. Oooooooooh, so EVERYB ODY CONSPIRED!

Give me a break. It's a crock!

The conspiracy you describe is even bigger than the one to keep the American people from knowing that we never went to the moon!

My :tinfoilhat: must be leaking because I can feel Karl Rove's mind rays.

[KittyWampus]

38. Walt, Very Few Of Us Can Trust You Any More. Repeatedly We Have

pointed to factual evidence and you continue your meaningless diatribe.

I suggest you stop your attempts to make those of us who have read up on paperless e-voting look like "conspiracy nuts"... it only makes you look ridiculous.

[Walt Starr]

46. Oh, so now I'm "ridiculous"

because I see what the hell really happened on Tuesday and am unafraid to admit it on a site that refuses to accept the reality that we got our asses whipped?

[LibertyorDeath]

53. Walt Diebold ES&S & Sequoia fucked America not just

The Democrats but all Americans with their paperless Unaditable
Voting Machines. Why the fuck else would you want Voting Machines to be unauditable other than you want to commit Fraud.
The capper they are all 3 owned by People with Extensive ties to the Republicans to the far right of the republican party.

No WE DO NOT HAVE INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF.

but there are thousands of people working to get it.

I understand your point but this is a complex & an up hill battle we may get a programmer with a shred of Conscience to come forward from one of these Companies a whistle blower I do not know where this will lead
Electronic voting is the worst thing to come along in decades it has undermined
Democracy in America such as it is to the point that Millions of people do not trust the results of this election,2002& 2000.

Emotions are running high here lets not take our eye of the ball.

Circumstantial evidence sometimes leads to evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is my hope and the hope of many here.
I'm sure it's yours also.

[stepnw1f]

57. No.. You got Your Ass Wipped!

;)

[TruthIsAll]

60. Walt, a few questions....

Do you believe fraud occurred in 2000?
Yes or No?

Do you believe fraud occurred in 2002?
Yes or No?

Do you believe fraud occurred in 2004?
Yes or No?

Do you believe Bush won Florida in 2000?
Yes or No?

Do you believe The Repugs stole Max Cleland's senate seat in 2002? Yes or No?

Do you believe Bush won Florida in 2004?
Yes or No?

Do you believe that Republicans control the voting machines?
Yes or No?

Did you believe Bush when he said Saddam had WMD?
Yes or No?

Are you ready to listen to the facts about Election Theft 2004?
Yes or No?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

67. Walt

I'm so saddened......because I know wonder things about you that I never thought I would....

[IdaBriggs]

43. I like your theory about the infallibility of computer programmers.

But we're human, and (I hate to burst your bubble) we make mistakes. One wrongly placed comma, flipping an IF/THEN/ELSE statement, and suddenly the results are screwy. :) Best, Ida

[Walt Starr]

45. Please quote where I made that statement.

I simply never siad it.

[IdaBriggs]

49. Of course you didn't say it in those words --

but that is the logical extension of the "no fraud" thought process. As I said in an earlier post, fraud can be "on purpose" which means "criminal" or "on accident" which means "oops!"

Go look here www.invisibleida.com/New_Hampshire.htm for why I started pushing for the New Hampshire recount. I'm now heading the "Election Fraud Data Analysis Team" (EFDAT), and I want a HAND recount of every single state. Please. Because the numbers do NOT make sense.

I'm a programmer and an analyst, married to a finance guy. We programming folk (occasionally) make mistakes -- its kind of a secret, though. :) Common sense says that when the numbers don't make sense, you double check them. Some people think computer glitches are only 'tin foil hat' things, but in reality, they are pretty common, and the only time the data can be tested is during an election.

We NEED to double check the data; if the RAW DATA matches with the REPORTED DATA, then its going to be time for the rest of us to suck it up, smile and politely say, "Thank you, sir, may I have another?" If they don't match up, then we need to FIX it (because every single election without an audit trail becomes suspect), and put systems into place to catch these things a little earlier. This is kind of a "DUH!" point, in my mind, although I say it with no disrespect to you.

Walt, I am one of the best in my field. I have eight years of experience doing statistical analysis for a major telecommunication carrier (ON EDIT: Doh! Sp!), and have been "little miss computer geek" for over twenty years; I've been the database manager/developer for three projects in the last three years that saved multinational corporations over $90 Million -- when I say the numbers don't make sense, I'm speaking with an expertise that should be taken seriously.

Can you trust me, just a little bit? And help out? :)

[Walt Starr]

34. You don't even have enough to take to a grand jury

let alone enough to make a case.

[noiretextatique]

23. it's been less than one week

that leaves another 31 days or so.

[noiretextatique]

26. how about a recount in NH?

if during the course of the recount evidence of fraud is found, wouldn't that be a step in the right direction?

[Walt Starr]

36. If election officials in NEw Hampshire uncover fraud

I'll eat my shoe.

[IdaBriggs]

50. How about instead of eating your shoe....

You buy me some ice cream? :) Ida

[LoZoccolo]

62. Read the rules and stop being rude.

:hi: :nuke:

[LisaL]

5. This is not a court of law-this is a message board.

:crazy:

[Walt Starr]

7. Oh, then these charges don't mean shit and are a pipe dream of

a message board. My bad, I didn't realize this BBV crap was just an exercise in mental masturbation.

And to think suckers are actually donating money in order to engage in said mental masturbation.

:eyes:

[LisaL]

17. Well, many a time investigations can go on for years-

before the arrest is made.
You seem to think we have to have all the prove now, and beyond the reasonable doubt, at that. Even police doesn't work that way.
:spank:

[Walt Starr]

37. You DO have to prove it now

or nobody is ever going to listen to you and this crap will further erode anythign resemblingrespect the electorat has for the Democratic PArty.

[JI7]

9. i agree

if we want to win in the future. not just nationally, but senate and house seats we have to deal with these cultural issues that divide us. Bush's increase in popular vote came from places he had done well before but they increased turnout since people came to vote for the bigoted measures right wingers put up on the ballots.

we have to figure out a way to win in these areas WITHOUT giving up on equal rights. look at alabama which voted AGAINST removing racist segregationist language in their constitution. there is a huge cultural problem.

this doesn't mean we should not deal with the problems with voting. we can do both. it's very likely as we uncover things that bush would still hold a lead. the polls before the elections always had a close race.

[Walt Starr]

10. I do agree we need paper verification on voting machines

I just haven't seen any evidence to support the charges of fraud.

:shrug:

I keep thinking I need to be fitted with a new :tinfoilhat: because the mind rays must be getting to me.

Was that just a black helicopter?

[LiberteToujours]

19. Agree about the paper verification

I also do not think that fraud occurred during this election, but the part that frightens me is that we really have no way of knowing. It didn't happen this year, but what about 2006? 2008? Also, even if there is no intentional fraud on the part of the candidates, the software in this machines is laughably insecure and is prone to outside attacks. As a computer scientist, it is rather shocking to me. The central tabulator for these machines runs on a simple, insecure Windows machine using an MS Access database with unencrypted data.

Just think about how many "fatal security flaws" are being found in Windows on a constant basis. Do you really think there aren't hackers on this right now, trying to figure out ways to get into these machines?

[TruthIsAll]

63. You do not think fraud occurred? If you have no way of knowing, it did!

You say:
"It didn't happen this year, but what about 2006? 2008?"
How the fuck do you know?

"Also, even if there is no intentional fraud on the part of the candidates, the software in this machines is laughably insecure and is prone to outside attacks"

Duh, and that's how they stole it.

God gave you a brain.
Use it.

[ohioan]

65. What's even more frightening is the notion that

Dems will be so obsessed with proving fraud that we will completely miss the more important issue: that the Republicans have substantially improved their message, strategy and GOTV to the point that they are kicking our asses on the ground.

The Republicans want nothing more than for us to ignore their growing strength and believe that the ONLY reason we lost is that they cheated. That will mean we won't do a damned thing to correct our own game (why should we if it's so perfect that the only way to beat it is to cheat?) If we continue to whine about fraud and fail to recognize and fix our own shortcomings, they'll win the next elections in a walk.

[fujiyama]

29. That's pretty much the way I see it

While there may be some instances of fraud in this election (I haven't seen enough data one way or the other to decide), I think the party has to start looking at why it is virtually unelectable at the federal level in many states.

It's important to scrutinize electronic voting. We defenitely need a verified paper trail. We also need to try to eleminate conflicts of interest like in the case with Diebold. Also while there may have been several instances of malfunctions with these machines, as you said, it's unlikely to change the outcome of this election.

[IdaBriggs]

42. Fraud does not have to be "on purpose" -- it can be "on accident" too.

Go here: www.invisibleida.com/New_Hampshire.htm

Go read the Ralph Nader threads in the Presidential forum.

PM me if you want to talk. :) Best, Ida

[Goldmund]

55. You don't need a witness to know that the crime has been commited.

Let's take murder as an analogy. Once you find a dead body, you don't need a witness to know that the murder has been commited. A witness will help you determine WHO COMMITED THE MURDER, and HOW IT WAS COMMITED -- not whether the murder has been commited; the corpse alone is enough to establish that.

Right now, we're in the process of establishing whether what we've found by the side of the road is a dead body, beyond a reasonable doubt. We have not yet moved on to determine WHO DID IT or HOW IT WAS DONE; that will come after the existence of the crime has been established. Though, to be fair, it's pretty clear who benefited from this crime, if there was one, and who has a probable motive.

Now -- if we can conclusively show that there is a definite dissonance between exit poll/actual result differences in counties that used Optical Scan EV machines and those that did not, and if that difference is substantial, then a statistician can figure out the tangible probability of that happening in just such a way with no interference. If there indeed is -- as TIA's and other data shows -- a huge difference between Exit Poll errors in those two kinds of counties, I suspect that the probability of that happening without intervention is less than 1/1000th of one percent (again, a statistician can work out the exact probability -- this is just my intuitive estimate). And that falls under the definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt". If it turns out that way, then we will have a corpse, and we'll know there has been a crime commited. HOW it was done and WHO did it is next.

[Steelangel]

69. frankly

I don't think Bush would win the election without Diebold & vote issues. Evidences actually are increasing but of course I wouldn't keep my hopes up for that. They actually hide it so well this time, unlike 2000.

That's my guts. You shared your opinion with us, nothing more or less than that. I trust Bush enough to fail us again by 2006, that will do the trick for me at least.

[are_we_united_yet]

71. Walt

Is your objection the use of the word fraud vs voter tampering?

[LibertyorDeath]

74. I hope that shoe has dog shit on it!!

AIndependentTexan (1000+ posts)Sat Nov-06-04 02:34 PM
Original message
Here we Go, Florida Democrat Goes to the FBI

The Democratic contender for US House of Representatives in Florida's 16th disctrict, Jeff Fisher, has gone to the FBI, claiming conclusive proof of the hacking of the 2004 and 2002 elections. Things are moving, people, don't stop putting the pressure on the media and our reps:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm

[Azure]

2. I agree. Enough of this whining.

Enough of this "THEY STOLE IT" routine. By labelling discourse about our future direction "self-flagellation," we pretty much ensure that whatever REALITY-BASED problems caused us to lose will NEVER be addressed.

As a result, we will lose again.

If there was fraud, find it. But don't think it excuses us from looking at ways we could do better.

[LisaL]

4. If there is fraud-we could never do better.

[Walt Starr]

8. There's the word

*IF*

I've seen nothing to suggest these allegations go beyond that word.

[LisaL]

13. Well, if we had prove beyond the reasonable doubt-

I presume this election would be overturned and whoever responsible would go to jail. Where do you suppose we can get this iron-clad prove?
:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[Azure]

14. Don't worry, Walt.

This too shall pass. Most of it is coming from an understandable state of denial. The tinfoil hat stuff will calm down in a few weeks when people start to accept the ugly fact that yes, America was actually dumb enough to elect Bush.

It's understandable when you look at it. For a lot of people, this election means something a lot like the death of America itself, and that's a hard pill to swallow. It's no surprise that there are some shouting "fraud" so vehemently. At the moment, it's the only possibility they are prepared to consider. The alternative (a legitimate Shrub win) is still too unthinkable.

This BBV furor will settle down after a while. Just give it some time. When people are ready to accept (without puking or crying) that Americans are indeed capable of electing someone like Bush, a lot of the BBV stuff will disappear like magic.

[TruthIsAll]

18. That it a lot of bull and you know it.

tia

[Azure]

22. You might know it, but I don't.

I'm a member of the fact-based community.

[noiretextatique]

25. how do you explain the exit poll differences?

the fact that they don't mesh at all with the actual results? i'd love to hear a fact-based explanation for that.

[Walt Starr]

32. Flawed modeling used to compile the exit poll results

They used various models. CNN changed from one model to another the night of the election.

On top of that, not one single person who is making these claims can produce the exit poll data. Instead they produce the exit poll data based upon a flawed model. That's what was "leaked" to the internet.

[LisaL]

27. If you don't investigate or ask for investigation-

you will never find any facts or any prove. And maybe there is none. Maybe it was all honest and fair. Maybe not. But if you don't investigate, you will not find anything.

[YouLiedTheyDied]

40. With all due respect Sir

I don't think your models with a 99.99% win probability did anything to help matters. You had people believing it was in the bag, and when a result we all dreaded and are physically ill over what came to pass, we were left asking how it could be. I think its natural to at first think it must have been stolen rather than we dropped the ball. We screwed up. We were out-hustled. The thugs laid traps along the way and we fell into them. We allowed them to define the debate and we walked down the path they wanted us to, and we paid the price for it. There will be calls to moderate our stances to appeal to many who went to the Bush camp. I say bullshit, we need to move to the left and define ourselves and our stark differences and not to be dragged into these traps where we have a candidate vascillating and be called flip flops. We got suckered, it wasn't stolen, we handed it to him. No more John Kerrys and John Edwards, its time for Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and Wesley Clark... that is what we need!

Lets figure out how we win seats back in the midterm and how we will win the White House in 2008.

[Baja Margie]

28. No

not in my lifetime will this BBV stuff settle down. Maybe they can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, but I don't doubt for a second that it didn't happen.there are no safeguards on that software!

I already know how stupid Americans are, I know alot of 'em voted for Bush, and the fact that Bush won, by hook or crook I have accepted. I also do not expect the press to do one fucking thing about this.

Even if this goes nowhere, a serious movement should start to ban these machines. Period.

That's the least we can do.

Funny thing, once again today we spoke with our Mexican friends, even the Mexicans believe it was fraud, and they can smell fraud a mile away." So, they said, now we have the biggest drug dealer, Jorge Hank Rohn aas our Mayor and you have the biggest idiot, George Bush as your President." The Newscast out of Mexico City is even questioning the validity of this election.

The unrealistic ones are the ones who cannot see this and put the pieces together.

[Walt Starr]

31. I'll tell you one thing, BBV tinfoilhat stuff means a lot of cash

And that cash is going to a prescious few who are turning this tinfolihat theory into a cottage industry.

I gave at the office.

:evilgrin:

[TruthIsAll]

16. Hey Walt, sounds like you've been talking to Carlos Jiacinto recently.

You remind me of him. Afraid of the truth or just in self-denial?

There's been a coup d'etat here, in case you didn't know it. But it happened on Dec. 13, 2000.

SCOTUS helped Bush steal it once before. Remember that one?

Do you honestly believe the fascists would not resort to massive fraud to stay in power?

Walt, you've been a steadfast DUer for a long time. Have you learned nothing here at DU? Conspiracies EXIST. They are all over the place.
Bush has LIED about everything, and claims he has a MANDATE.

It's time to take back our country. But first we must admit we have a real problem here. Democracy has been hijacked. We cannot fix it by changing philosophies, only by kicking the fascists out.



Come on, man, accept the CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Believe your lying eyes, NOT CNN.

[Walt Starr]

30. Let's just say I've learned to recognize a red herring when I see one

This is a red herring. I've also learned something else about red herrings, the media can smell 'em a mile away!

You want to prove fraud? Get some witnesses willing to testify that they helped steal the election and give the precise methodology they used to steal it. Provide the hard physical evidence to back up that testimony, and get it all before a grand jury this next week because the certification of the results will start very soon and a slate of electors will cast its ballots come December 13.

Until then good luck, you'll need one helluva lot of it!

[The Flaming Red Head]

39. The red herring is that Bush won on a morals vote

I can smell the media and they stink like a dead fish.

[LisaL]

44. If there was such a witness, I suspect he/she would not very easily come

forward.
:eyes:
If you are not interested in this subject-maybe you should move along.
When there are questions all over the place of how can anyone be sure who they voted for without a paper trail and with republican made voting machines-you want to move along (nothing to see here)-well, get going.
I am not sure how can you not ask a question whether in fact votes were accurately counted knowing what we know about electronic voting machines and people who make them that promise deliver electoral votes to Bush.

[IdaBriggs]

51. How about SMOKING GUN?

Go Read This: www.invisibleida.com/New_Hampshire.htm and keep your money, thank you. You have already done a great deal of work for the campaign, and I can tell you are just burned out; we'll pick up the ball for a while, and when you are ready to come back out to play, we'll be here.

If the New Hampshire data matches up (which I don't think it will), then I will drop it. Until then, its NOT OVER.

Ida Briggs
EFDAT Coordinator

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

68. Walt

Prove fraud DIDN'T occur in this election.

Go ahead.

We'll wait.

[foo_bar]

75. appeal to ignorance

The burden of proof is always on the person asserting something. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.

"OK, so if you don't think the grey aliens have gained control of the US government, can you prove it?"

http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#ignorantiam

[RafterMan]

15. Remember that the polls showed

a tie race, against the worst president ever.

That's not good enough.

[Walt Starr]

33. The polls are always fucked up

I remember seeing us revile the polls that showed us down and cheering the polls that showed us up.

The only thing the polls ever demonstrated is how gullible supportes of any candidate really are.

[DoYouEverWonder]

70. We've got a little over a month until the Electoral College

Instead of ripping people up for trying to get to the bottom of this, why don't you pitch in and help? You're good at doing research and a lot of people tried to help you when you were wasting our time trying to prove whether or not W deserved one particular metal.

Now when it is of the utmost importance to uncover the fraud that we believe happened but will be difficult to prove, all you seem to want to do is create dissension. Constructive criticism is one thing, but the game your playing is either to distract from the issue at hand, or a sad need for personal attention.

Now instead of wasting people time and energy, why don't you either move to FR or give us a hand around here?

[ohioan]

66. I posted my similar view before I read yours. You said it much better.

[txindy]

11. Until Nader gets the recount in New Hampshire, there will be skeptics

Even here. If Nader can't get it done in NH, I'm sure there will be someone else in another state. Badnarik is looking at challenging in Ohio. Cobb is also in on it. Once we establish a pattern of 'miscounts' in one state with optical scanning machines, we have cause to investigate like machines in other states. That includes Florida. We don't need them all. Just enough to put us over the top in the EC.

This has legs and it's not going away. We don't need to convince everyone here. They'll see what comes of our efforts. It's the end result that matters.

[Jasper 91]

56. True , we don't have to convince everyone here

But I am amazed that some seem so closed minded . I have looked at all the evidence , and in the face of it , I am at a loss to understand how anyone could deny that something suspicious , to say the least , has gone on .

I think that all the people who are putting down the those who are working hard to prove that this election was stolen , are being grossly unfair . They are not saying that they believe voter fraud has gone on because they are in denial , rather their eyes are wide open , and they can see masses and masses of facts and data , that prove incontrovertibly that the results aren't kosher .

Walt , you seem the most adamant that there is nothing to see here , so as you are so well conversed with all the facts , care to explain the optiscan results in Florida ? Thankyou .

[The Minus World]

24. Full Agreement.

If we sink into an introspective coma, completely unaware of the very real possibility that this election was nothing more than a puppet show of media appeasement, our error as a political party is much more profound than our failure to appeal to fundamentalist bigots in Alabama.

That possibility is staring us in the face, and I fear that Bush and his team are already two steps ahead of us.

Simple conditional logic here:

If the election was stolen, then it follows that such manipulation of numbers will misrepresent turnout.

We (the democratic party) had the turnout; we had the votes. They (the republican party) owned the central tabulators. Checkmate.

If Democratic leaders fail to whip this gust of raw information into a maelstrom, we will have been failed by our party. I tend to be optimistic in that I believe their silence speaks of the maelstrom to come. Kerry has had a history of wearing a white hat, even when they weren't fashionable.

All hail the second coming.

[seabeyond]

41. truth, thank you for saying it. i have been for four days

saying it on every thread i can. talk of changing party, what we did wrong, yada yada yada......the horrors of dem ability. kerry preformance

we won. we won by mandate. that nation didnt vote bush in. the american people did come thru.

why are we acting like it is anything but

i agree, its the fraud stupid. no changing adjusting the dems, no giving up social issues or moral values to win, no heading to the right, or changing who we are to get the vote

we GOT the vote

[AzDar]

47. Does anyone know if Big Dog actually said this? n/t

[gauguin57]

48. Can't we do BOTH -- investigate fraud AND figure out why Kerry didn't

win in a landslide over a complete incompetent whose administration did absolutely NOTHING right in either foreign or domestic policy.

We can do BOTH. We need to make it "not even close" in the mid-terms; but we need to get recounts of the optical scan ballots (at least), and investigate whether there was vote fraud with the e-voting machines (as best we can). We should push for recounts wherever they are POSSIBLE.

We can build a better party for 2006, AND determine whether the 2004 election was stolen from us. Even if we could prove that it was squeaker-close instead of 3 million votes apart ...

But if all we can do is bicker, we'll never get anywhere. So, those who want to charge ahead on the voter investigation, go for it. For those who want to work on strengthening the party and figuring out what we can do differently (without losing our principles) in 2006 and 2008, go for it.

[bitchkitty]

52. Thank you for living up to your handle, truth is all -

I salute you!

[leesa]

54. Exactly. Don't play their game. We have mobilized enormously on

our message. It is just that Americans are still too fat. They need to hurt more before they wake up.

THINK of how far we have come in the last year alone. We have Air America now. Tiny bloggers have grown very large. It's barely started. For those of us who have been around awhile, I do not believe we are headed in the wrong direction, no matter what the warmongers tell us. People are beginning to wake up.

[shelley806]

58. Could someone please google: hawaii diebold cheney.....I tried and

could not get one of the links reported in Ohio business news. Reason for link...intuition and Cheney's trip on election eve with B* last minute trip to Ohio...Maybe someone else can get through.

[tommcintyre]

59. EVOTING FRAUD RESOURCE CENTER

Get info - Suggest info - 'nuff said

http://www.independentmediasource.com/evotingfraud.htm

[WillyT]

61. I Resented The Hell Out Of The rePukes Telling Me To "Get Over It" In 2000

I resent it infinitely more, when fellow Democrats do it now!

If you don't want to participate in digging up and finding whatever evidence there may be, then get the HELL OUT OF THE WAY!!!

And BTW - If WE are wrong, at least we might get some momentum for closer election scrutiny in the future.

If the naysayers are wrong, they get a pat on the back from the rePukes for handing them every election for the foreseeable future, and ending Democracy as we once knew it.

:wtf:

TIA... this was not directed at you. I just didn't want to get banned for calling others out, so I went generic. I hope, LOL!!!

:shrug:

[TruthIsAll]

64. Of course, Willy, I knew it was not meant for me. We are on the same side

tia

[johan helge]

72. Every election should be checked.

I don't understand Walt Starr's attitude. Doesn't he want the election to be checked? All elections should be checked - especially with such a bizarre election system (only in America!) and such bizarre results.

[bloom]

73. Serbia has a better, more verifiable system than the US

Any country with as many anomalies as were in this election would want to recount - at least sample areas to check for voter tampering.

My favorite story is still the Dick Morris article where he INSISTS that exit polls are accurate - but he can't comprehend voter fraud in his own country so he has to make up a story about why someone would sabotage the exit polls. I think it's bats.

"To screw up one exit poll is unheard of. To miss six of them is incredible. It boggles the imagination..."

http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx