Choicepoint Prez's wife co-founds and funds Election Reform Organization

[mod mom]

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0069.html

"Donna Curling, the wife of the President of Choicepoint, it seems, is also the Co-founder of a group which has endorsed Holcomb, Georgians for Verified Voting, and has funded a national voter integrity organization, VoteTrustUSA.Verified Voting, and has funded a national voter integrity organization, VoteTrustUSA."

OK HELP ME OUT HERE. 1. IS THIS ALL NEW NEWS? AND 2. COULD THIS BE A PLOY TO HARM THE DEM CANDIDATE? NOT BEING FROM GA, I'M NOT SURE.

Choicepoint President Funds Secretary of State Candidate Scott Holcomb in Georgia

By Matthew Cardinale and Betty Clermont, Atlanta Progressive News (July 13, 2006)

(APN) ATLANTA - With the Georgia Primary for Secretary of State only days away, Atlanta Progressive News has learned Democratic Candidate Michael "Scott" Holcomb has accepted campaign contributions from the President of Choicepoint Corporation and the President's wife.

Choicepoint has come under scrutiny for its well-researched acquisition of the company responsible for the false felon voter list which disenfranchised tens of thousands of minorities in the 2000 elections in Florida. Choicepoint, headquartered in Alpharetta, Georgia, with over a billion dollars in revenue in 2005, is synonymous with voter fraud and Bush cronyism to many advocates. It has billions of data points about individuals and has contracts with the US government to provide much of that information to them toward their goal of total information awareness.

Mr. Douglas Curling, the President of Choicepoint, gave $1,000 to Holcomb's Campaign on December 19, 2005, according to campaign finance disclosures dated December 31, 2005. Curling's wife, Donna Curling, gave $500 to Holcomb's Campaign on December 21, 2005.

<snip>
But there's much more.
Donna Curling, the wife of the President of Choicepoint, it seems, is also the Co-founder of a group which has endorsed Holcomb, Georgians for Verified Voting, and has funded a national voter integrity organization, VoteTrustUSA.Verified Voting, and has funded a national voter integrity organization, VoteTrustUSA.

[robinlynne]

1. That is weird. strange. odd. Maybe she did it to get information about

what verified voting and votetrust USA are doing?
or to try to take over and destroy those groups?
or, when we find out they gave millions to the republicnas, they can say they donated to the other side too and spin it.
A donation of 500 is pretty silly. choicepoint has several no bid contracts with the white house and rep party for millions and millions of dollars. Bush is choicepointing latin american countries now, 7 countries according to greg palast.

[Kelvin Mace]

9. Or maybe, they are

genuine progressives?

I quick check of OpenSecrets.org shows Donna gave:

$26,700 Dem Senate Campaign Committee
$5,000 PAC fort Change
$5,000 DNC Services Corp
$4,200 Diane Feinstein
$4,200 Hilary Clinton
$6,000 to Mark Pryor, John Barrow, and Bob Casey.

$0 to the GOP

That $51K only to Dems in just this cycle. From 2002-2004 she gave $13,000 to Dems, including Dennis Kucinich, and $0 to the GOP.

I found other donations under Mrs. Douglas C. Curling:

$21,000 - DNC Services (2004)

Her husband DID give to a couple of scumbags, notably Orin Hatch and Saxby Chamblis ($500), but he seems to have given more to Dems ($2,000 to Max Cleland, $2,000 to John Kerry, $4,000 to DSCC, and $1,000 to Tom Daschle).

In 2006, the husband also gave $26,000 to the DSCC.

[adarling]

20. well then that says it all

shes a dem and proud about it and so is her husband.

[Land Shark]

26. Players donate money to candidates to get ACCESS

Because many or even most people give contributions to get access, the contributions themselves prove little or nothing. PARTICULARLY Democratic contributions given the official position of the party on election fraud....

of more concern to me is that US Supreme Court ruling that once someone releases something for one purpose, it is released for all purposes (this is how databases of phone numbers develop, you release your privacy because you've sent the numbers called to the phone company for billing purposes and from there the phone company can do what they want or need to so long as there's no law or contract specifically prohibiting it).

In other words, once you release your activist email to choicepoint in any way, do you have any rights to control it at all? the very business, the very claim to fame of choicepoint is that they compile huge electronic dossiers on americans and sell hits on those dossiers to outfits such as the FBI, at the rate of well over a million paid hits a year.

This is not fantasy land regarding what choicepoint does and who it sells to. And there's no assurances of any kind that the emails of activists are not being data mined.

All legitimate activists should, IMHO, seek definitive and iron clad assurances that this kind of data mining is NOT occurring and CAN NOT POSSIBLY OCCUR with activist emails. I'm not saying there's no way that can be done, I'm saying the issue has to be dealt with, AND NOT EXCUSED.

[Cookie wookie]

35. Many or most people give contributions to get access?

That's a broad statement. By this logic, I guess many or most people at DU who donated to Kerry and other Democratic candidates did so to get access.

Your post goes on to state: "PARTICULARLY Democratic contributions given the official position of the party on election fraud...."

You're saying that people who are fighting for verified voting who give money to Democrats are doing so in order to stop verified voting from happening?

Interesting perspective. Just exactly how does that work? Let's see, work to get rid of paperless evoting, contribute to Democratic candidates, then influence them, because of your contributions, to not get rid of paperless evoting.

Sounds like a plan.

[Kelvin Mace]

43. This is exactly the kind of thinking

that makes us a laughing stock with public officials.

Once again, I see a organization taking concrete steps to work within the system to accomplish real change, being slimed by people who do nothing but hold press conference, send out self-aggrandizing press releases and raise money (then refuse to properly account for the money raised).

The viewpoint of many of these folks is that to disagree with them means you work for the "enemy" (Diebold, Karl Rove, the Bavrian Illuminati, etc).

[Boredtodeath]

46. People with no political experience

and ripped the definition of "pragmatism" out of the dictionary.

[AmBlue]

59. Paul, SHAME ON YOU!!! This is despicable...

I met you in DC in April and I am shocked and amazed at how you, who claim to be part of the election integrity activist community, are taking so much time and going so far out of your way to do damage not only to VTUSA and all of its hard-working members, but to some of the most important work yet accomplished for verified voting. I, as a member of VTUSA, take it personally and cannot help but seriously question your motives. I just about kill myself daily for this cause, as do many others, including taking precious time away from my family and young children to do this work and it is endless. What have YOU done or accomplished for verified voting lately? If you were, in fact, working for the cause, you wouldn't have time for this!!! Did getting kicked out of VTUSA mess up your speaking tour or something? I think I smell sour grapes and your true motives are showing loud and clear.

Joan and the leaders of VTUSA, on the other hand, have given their lives to this cause. They have proven themselves time and time again to be valiant, courageous and tireless advocates. There is NEVER a day that Joan, particularly, has not made herself abundantly available for even the smallest question or concern. I trust the VTUSA leadership completely because it is plainly evident where their allegiance lies-- with voters whose voices are silenced.

You, however, a johnny-come-lately with a gift for smoke, mirrors and questionable legalese, seem much more interested in damaging this movement just as it is picking up serious steam. HOW COULD YOU??? You engaged in these destructive and relentless smear and distraction tactics back in April, even as election integrity activists, including myself, were lobbying in DC for HR550 at our own expense--when most of us could ill afford to--and very successfully I might add. So much so that you were shown the VTUSA door for your destructiveness and misrepresentations. Now, as this issue hits the mainstream media due in large part to the efforts of the leadership of VTUSA and the blood, sweat and tears of dedicated, committed citizens who want desperately for everyone's vote to count, you're at it again. Why should anyone believe you?

NOW HEAR THIS: NOWHERE has any member of VTUSA EVER defended ChoicePoint or their actions. NOWHERE has any member of VTUSA attacked Mr. Palast and, as far as I can see, you have shown no evidence of either allegation. The only evidence I see is that of a fellow with a stone in his craw and a chip on his shoulder.

Mr. Palast is a busy fellow and "someone" must have relentlessly taken the time to feed him some serious misinformation. Sound like anyone you know?

Too much good has come from the efforts of VTUSA and its members, for you to try and tear it down. What could your motives possibly be? Unless you only intend to use that talent for obfuscation and law degree of yours to hurt all of us who are doing the heavy lifting. The REAL activists are working to further the cause, and wouldn't dream of undoing the good and fruitful efforts of so many, especially when it has taken years to get to where we are.

Go do something productive, would you? REALLY.

[Bill Bored]

27. Damn Liberals!

What business do they have funding election integrity organizations like VoteTrustUSA? We only want right wing wackos pushing for free, fair and verifiable elections so the Democrats can't have all their dead voters showing up at the polls, right?

The heck with these voting machines! They've been tested and re-tested, and those ballots have been counted and re-counted. These Curlings just won't be happy until the vote count comes out the way they want it to!

I'd take money from the Bush Crime Family, Catherine Harris, Ken Blackwell and Diebold any day! They're into free and fair elections, aren't they?

That's why in FL 2000, they used that bogus felons list even after ChoicePoint's predecessor company told them it was bogus. Those are MY KIND of election integrity advocates -- the Bushies and Harris/Blackwell. Wally O'Dell too!

I don't think anyone who works for GE, Exxon-Mobile or the MSM should be allowed to donate to election integrity groups either!

And those 9/11 victims? Who cares who they were? The important thing is for ChoicePoint not to be able to run DNA tests!

Should I go on or can we get back to work now?

[RaleighNCDUer]

2. Off the top of my head, there are various possibilities

none of which are anything more than hypotheses, with no evidence.

many Dem SoS have come out for HAVA and non-verifiable vote systems -- possibly because they got campaign contributions from people they would normally be wary of? and if those people contributed to good Dems, they couldn't be up to no good, could they?

How legit is VoteTrustUSA.Verified Voting? Is it maybe in the vein of 'Healthy Forests' and 'Clear Skies'? The kind of organization that makes a little noise, but doesn't commit to action, while dissing all the 'conspiracy theorists' who are 'muddying the waters'? Who are they? Who supports them?

Anybody know?

[mod mom]

4. Considered very legit.

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. Yeah, i went looking for it, and it looks OK,

but it does still bother me that the name is so similar to the much better known VerifiedVoting.Org.

but maybe I'm just being paranoid. wouldn't be the first time.

[Kelvin Mace]

11. There are only so many ways you can use the words

"verified", "trust", "vote" "paper" and not get redundant. :)

[AmBlue]

66. Name similarity?? Are you kidding?

It sure doesn't seem to bother VerifiedVoting as both groups often work together on important efforts. Get a life. This is ridiculous.

[Kelvin Mace]

10. I have seen noth8ing that has given me any cause for

concern. I know several folks in the group and they are on the level.

[AmBlue]

60. Go to their website www.votetrustusa.org

And check them out if you really want to know, instead of making vaguely accusational remarks on a publicly read forum.

I'll tell you who supports them: I DO. I'm a member and the leader of an election integrity group in Florida who couldn't be doing what we do without VoteTrustUSA's unwavering support and without the support of the over 50 other grassroots election integrity groups all over the country that make up the VoteTrustUSA coalition. What we all do and share with each other is at the core of the election integrity movement and one look at the VTUSA website should tell you all you need to know.

PLEASE PEOPLE!! Think before you assist in smearing hardworking, clear-thinking, devoted citizens who have given their lives to this cause. We are working hard for the good of all Americans and to ensure that every voter's vote is counted.

[flyarm]

64. i will also stand with AMBLUE and others to say i have the utmost

respect for the integrity of VoteTrustUsa ..who i was introduced to by Andy Stephenson who was one of the co-founders!..when we could get no help or support before and after the 2004 election in fla by Black box voting and bev harris..i turned to Andy for help..the help we were promised by bev harris and never recieved..

I was both an elected Dem delegate for Kerry and i was also a poll watcher for the primaries and the early vote and the general election.

i have asked for help from Vote trust in educating people in my county to the voting machine problems..and in getting help from folks all over the country..

i have never ever been turned down for help..and anyone i brought to them was treated professionally and with the utmost respect..even if they were novices to the machines..they have been helped every step of the way..in the most professional manner!

I know why Andy wanted to start Vote Trust Usa..and i know he was very selective in who he helped and who he who he would share his expertise and allow to share his name with after his experience with bev harris! Andy had the utmost respect for Joan Kravwitz..without question.

this is bullshit!

fly

[hedda_foil]

72. Thank you, flyarm.

No matter how much we accomplish we always talk about how much better Andy would have done. Nobody will ever fill his shoes.

[grasswire]

3. sounds very fishy to me

Hiding this under the wife's name. I hope someone with investigative skills will check it out. Might want to send it to Greg Palast.

[Kelvin Mace]

45. They didn't hide their names when they donated

almost $100,000 to John Kerry, John Edwards, the DSCC, Dennis Kucinich, Hilary Clinton, Bob Casey, Mark Pryor et al.

[Kelvin Mace]

5. Reality check

Were the Curlings running ChoicePoint in 2000? If not, why are they being attacked for something they didn't have anything to do with?

Why are we opposed to progressive Dems buying into ChoicePoiint and supporting Georgia candidates who supports VVPB? So Bev would have us support Cathy Cox who ENDORSES Diebold?

Since this issue has nothing to do with voting machines, why are folks talking to Bev? You notice Bev misses NO opportunity to impugn a competitors.

“Choicepoint is a company that’s been involved with elections in ways that make a lot of us uncomfortable. They were definitely involved with buying the company while it was involved in the felon voting purge,” Bev Harris said.

So, if George Soros bought Diebold, Bev would claim that he was now evil?

Mrs. Curling had been participating on the VoteTrustUSA listserv under a false name, Harris said. “So people didn’t know they were discussing their plans with the wife of Choicepoint’s President.”

Nice use of insinuation. 99.9% of the folks on DU post under "false names", including Bev who routinely has posted after being banned. The use of pseudonyms is common, and doesn't have sinister connotations.

If Curling's husband was working for Diebold, then I would have cause to br suspicious, but since ChoicePoint doesn't make voting machines, what is the problem?

What is hysterical about this article is Bev passing judgment on people for inferred monkey business when she won't come clean about her mismanagement of BBV money.

[robinlynne]

17. Choicepoint created the mexican voter rolls for The FBI (which has no

business messing with a foreign election or foreign data for that matter) for this past disputed election. Choicepoint was arrested in mexico and kicked out.
Choicepoint is actively working the the whitehouse to influence elections NOW.
see greg palast.com for details. or Armed Madhouse.

[EFerrari]

57. The Liar for my Secretary of State refused at length to deny

that Choicepoint wasn't involved in developing the CA voter registration database.

That would be the colored people, liberal voter excluding database.

[booley]

6. This sounds familiar

Becuase in Armed Madhouse, Palast points out how instrumental the democratic Sec of State in New mexico was to getting votes for Kerry Tossed out in her state.

And she too got campaign contributions from a voting machine company.

The Dem reluctance to take voting fraud seriously has always confused me. But if certain select Dems are bing paid off to not take it seriously, that could explain a lot.

Is there a way to correlate what dems got contributions from people involved in companies like Choicepoint and which dems have obstructing or downplaying the threat of non-verifiable machines?

[Kelvin Mace]

15. ChoicePoint is NOT a voting machine company

Can folks please do their homework?

[robinlynne]

18. Choicepoint creates the databases for disenfranchinsing voters

all over the U.S., and now foreign countries for the US under the guise of anti-terrorrism.

[adarling]

22. no they don't

one of the companies that they bought a while ago DID do that. There have been alot of Choicepoint articles out there but where are your facts to back up that talk?

[robinlynne]

25. Greg Palast.com has all the info on choicepoint's Mexico project happening

last week.

[adarling]

40. problem with his too is that he is a joke

he is just as discredited as Bev Harris.

[Boredtodeath]

42. Agreed.

Greg Palast knows the truth and refuses to print it.

And, Greg, please sue me. Send me a PM and I'll give you my address and phone number so you can serve me. But, be aware - my first action at being served will be to solicit donations from Choicepoint for my defense.

Bring. It. On.

[Kelvin Mace]

32. No, they created a tool which has been used for that purpose

that was not the purpose of the tool. They specifically told Katherine Harris that the database wasn't accurate enough for purging databases. Harris used it anyway.

I have serious problems with VhoicePoint on privacy issues, but conflating that and the voter database problems with voting machines is wrong.

[booley]

21. But they DO have alot to do with voting

maybe you should do some homework.

Cons don't limit or compartmentalize voting fraud. And we shouldn't treat them as such.

[Kelvin Mace]

31. I am perfectly aware of what they do.

The poster made references to voting machines, which they do not do.

[diva77]

7. how 'bout that campaign for HR550 which seeks to privatize the audit

maybe Choicept is going into the auditing biz?? who knows? Votetrust seems bent on passing hr550 with that provision...

:shrug:

[flyingobject]

13. seems to?

please cite your evidence.

[Kelvin Mace]

14. They are not advocating "privatizing" audits.

Quoting Rep. Holt:

H.R. 550 does not open the door to EAC contracting. Rather, it limits the EAC’s already existing power to do so by requiring public bidding on all contracts. This makes it possible for established citizen groups (perhaps such as your own) to bid for audit contracts. This is exactly what we want: regular citizens protecting the integrity of our elections. If we left it to the states to do audits, the results would be as we’ve seen in the past.

[diva77]

16. which citizens' groups do you think will bid? I've followed some bidding

for voting wares and I don't feel so rosy about the advent of bidding for audits.

[Bill Bored]

28. Gray area, IMO.

If Holt wants citizens to do audits, that's what the bill should say. Not just to remove the EAC's exemption from the public bidding process which was granted to it under HAVA. Public bidding is of course better than no-bid contracts, but that won't ensure that the wrong people don't get to do the audits.

Frankly I don't think the consequence of privatized auditing was even considered one way or the other when the bill was written. Holt just stuck a provision in the bill to get rid of no-bid contracts which are currently legal for the EAC to write. That's not a bad thing, but it may have the unintended consequence of privatizing the auditing. So this needs to be fixed in the next Congress, unless the bill actually passes in this session, but then it can be fixed during the mark-up process, hopefully.

If they want ordinary citizens to do the audits, there are more effective ways than having them "bid" for the privilege.

That said we need HR 550 because in most of the country there's NO auditing of elections at all now! And inadequate e-voting security.

It's a simple matter to say that this auditing is inadequate or unfair and watchdog groups will be able to work on that if the bill actually passes EXACTLY as written. Meanwhile we got NUTTIN' when it comes to auditing and that's worse because we will never know who won any elections in states without independent audits, and that's most of them.

[Kelvin Mace]

33. The poster claimed that

the bill privatizes auditing, this is simply incorrect. Would I like the language tighter? Certinainly, but you don't always get what you want. Sinking the bill because someone might hire a CPA firm to conduct the audit is counterproductive.

[diva77]

53. if you substitute "voting machine" everywhere you used mention "audits"

kinda end up with the same flawed logic that permitted us to get into the mess we're in with voting machines now. If a group is to do the audits, wouldn't they have to be bonded, insured, running a business, etc. I don't understand how we can acquiesce to allow for groups, citizen or otherwise to bid for auditing.

Auditing is the last hope for security/accuracy with our elections. Any private group conducting an audit is likely to cut corners and not be accountable to the electorate.

We need a well thought out bill that deals with public implementation and enforcement of auditing rather than handing it over to some group.

Can someone please explain why this bid for auditing has to be included with the campaign for paper ballots in HR550?

[Kelvin Mace]

47. So, anyone who support HR-550 is suspect.

Great! Bev Harris' latest smear campaign is working. I suppose next we'll hear that Rush Holt is in the pay of Diebold/ChoicePoint/Rove.

[Boredtodeath]

50. More than that. Scott Holcomb doesn't know what 550 IS.

All you have to do is run against the favored nut case running for Secretary of State, i.e., Angela Moore.

Jul 6, 2006 – Georgia Political Digest.com RESULTS
GPD FLASH POLL - Democratic Primary - Secretary of State
According to our readers, it will be a tough Democratic Primary for Secretary of State. Two candidates appear to be in a hard fought battle for first and second place. The result are: Shyam Reddy 328 votes (44%), Scott Holcomb 326 votes (43%), Gail Buckner 35 votes (5%), Darryl Hicks 29 votes (4%), Angela Moore 26 votes (3%), and Walter Ray 7 votes (1%). Our readers cast a total of 751 votes, and we thank them for taking part in the poll. Tomorrow, we'll poll you on the Republican side of this race.

http://www.georgiadailydigest.com/cgi/sm/exec/search.cgi?start=141&template=index%2Fdefault.html&perpage=20

[diva77]

54. aren't we being a bit of a drama queen with this remark? I'm trying to

have a discussion and get some questions answered


:crazy:

[flyingobject]

12. let me get this right

Looks like a case of "Fair and Balanced Reporting" to me:

Before good people are harmed by slanted reporting, consider:

A. it is wrong for the President of ChoicePoint to donate $1,000
to a Pro Voter Verified Paper Ballot candidate for Secretary of State?

B. is is wrong for the wife of this man to donate $500
to a Pro Voter Verified Paper Ballot candidate for Secretary of State?

C. It is wrong that supposedly this wife has "co-founded" a voting integrity organization
that is fighting to get rid of paperless voting in Georgia?

D. The article admits that the current owners of ChoicePoint did not own
the company that purged the Florida Database.

E. Atlanta Progressive News has contacted a number of local and national voting rights
and voting integrity activists, and was surprised to see how many were actually
engaging in the practice of defending Choicepoint.
Several respondents were granted off-the-record interviews

F. Choicepoint did not do the voter purges, they purchased the company that had
done them.

G. To be sure, Katherine Harris’s Elections Division in Florida stated
it only wanted 80% accuracy on the list. Choicepoint has testified this
to a panel called by US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney,according to
footage in American Blackout

Oh Bev Harris hasn't been in the headlines awhile-

“Choicepoint is a company that’s been involved with elections in ways that
make a lot of us uncomfortable. They were definitely involved with buying
the company while it was involved in the felon voting purge,”
Bev Harris said.

Some of Bev Harris' activities make alot of Us unconfortable:
outing Duers on her website Freeper style,
the crazy BBV.org tax return for 2004
not paying payroll taxes in 2004?
saying that Andy Stephenson wasn't really sick on a freeper website
outright opposing the law,HR 550 that might put her out of business
burning bridges with mainstream media
accusing others of filing a Qui Tam when she WAS filing one


Bev Harris points fingers at people who accept donations, she should know!
Has anyone ever gotten a full accounting of Black Box Voting's tax return and
fund raising for 2004?

- Is this a case of projection ----

“I gotta tell you, it is painful to turn down money.
It would come with expectations.
You cannot become beholden. You start to rationalize,” Harris warned.

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0069.html

Learn how Bev Harris uses Psychology to raise money:
"H O W T O R A I S E A C A S H C O W"
(I have this saved to my computer in case it disappears)

Hilariously, Bev even admonishes readers to be sure and pay
the IRS the payroll taxes! But she didn't do that herself in
2004, right?

"DON'T TRY THIS WITH THE IRS!

is tempting to withhold payroll taxes and income taxes.
won't hear from the Revenue Service for months.
But when you do face the music big penalties will be assessed and
you personally are responsible if the company can't pay.
I do know of cases where, for good reason, the IRS has waived the penalties
and established a payment plan. (See "How to Unbezzle a Fortune,")
but don't count on it."
http://web.archive.org/web/20030618081314/www.talion.com/cashflow.htm

When you get time, read Bev's book on embezzling
http://www.bizactions.com/index.cfm/ba/e105/fa/46429474G774J423809P0P34768T0/

Hilarious that so much criticism is made by someone opposes
the only legislation that would get voter verified paper ballots in
Georgia.

Vote Trust USA does miraculous work -
they help individual states to succeed in their efforts
they provide expert advice from technical experts
they provide a weekly newsletter and assist people in writing articles
they have made numerous trips to DC to lobby in favor of verified voting
they provide legislative action alerts for activist groups
they help states exchange information quickly
their efforts got Lou Dobbs to cover the electronic voting issue

Same with Verified Voting.

These organizations have supported activists for years, and
they don't constantly ask for money.

[OnTheOtherHand]

30. I Am So Lost

The part of this story that has me totally confused is, in your words:

"E. Atlanta Progressive News has contacted a number of local and national voting rights
and voting integrity activists, and was surprised to see how many were actually
engaging in the practice of defending Choicepoint."

Umm, defending Choicepoint in what respect exactly? I feel that I have arrived in the middle of the story.

[Boredtodeath]

I would venture to guess

These folks were likely defending the Curlings.

So, based on all these leaps of logic, I'm not a Democrat because my spouse works for WalMart.

[OnTheOtherHand]

41. that seems like a decent guess

I tried to choose my words carefully -- I almost wrote something like "looks right to me," and I seem to recall that you got really annoyed last time I wrote that! ;)

You had a fair point then -- well, I don't know whether it was entirely fair, but certainly a point. Given the propensity to circular firing squads, it's dangerous even to give the appearance of endorsing attacks that I haven't exhaustively fact-checked. "could be right" was really as far as I could go.

Meanwhile, the guy who apparently did the research for that report has started a blog in which, I'm not quite sure, I think he insinuates that I am actually working with therealrobp. When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.

As long as I'm reserving judgment: I'm totally unconvinced that anyone paid APN (or whatever it's called) to write that stuff about Donna Curling. Hey, I'm just saying.

[Boredtodeath]

44. Thank you, I think.

Frankly, "it looks right" simply means "I'm not prepared to do the research required."

As far as paying APN - knowing and experiencing Georgia politics makes that accusation valid.

[OnTheOtherHand]

51. well, that's true, I wasn't

There is no conceivable way that I could do the research required to answer every question I care about, much less the many questions that I barely care about. Every opinion I express comes with a range of uncertainty, whether I state it explicitly or not. That was what I intended to convey by "looks." I sort of hoped that someone would spell out the arguments on the other side... and then I lost interest altogether. I'm just saying. Life is full. But if someone out there was injured by my sloppiness, then I apologize.

You will understand why I neither accept nor reject your representation regarding APN.

[Boredtodeath]

52. See Post #50 n/t

.

[Kelvin Mace]

48. Nah, you don't have to pay for this kind of lunacy

it appears spontaneously these days.

[adarling]

19. umm whats wrong with her helping out

Why do you guys have your panties in a twist? She is giving money to help our cause, is there a problem with that. Also, they bought the company after itdid the things in florida, i don't understand why these choicepoint articles keep coming up.

[flyingobject]

23. its not just ChoicePoint being attacked

they are also attacking Vote Trust USA and Verified Voting,
the two groups that have actually been able to get this
issue into the mainstream media, and have actually helped
get states' laws passed.

This is swift boating.

I would rather have someone good, someone progressive take over a
company that needs to be changed, wouldn't you?

Now,a pro VVPB candidate for Secretary of State in Georgia
is going to be swiftboated.

Maybe some folks don't want verified voting, and if
they see it coming to a state like Georgia, they try to
knock it down.

Some folks make big money off of this issue, heck,
Black Box Voting took in nearly $1 Million in 2004,
and if every state got verified voting, and especially
if HR 550 passed, there would be very little for bbv.org to do!

HR 550 would put Diebold and some "activists" groups out of business.

[adarling]

24. yeah your right

my friend was just telling me about how republicans try to make someone look awful when they are a threat, been doing it for years (sorry this sounds elementary but this whole situation is). I just hate it when people are getting bashed that have helped the cause of getting those damn machines out of our country or at least get a paper trail going.

[Kurovski]

56. People are trying to sort things out here.

We all know what "Republicans" do. Republicans engage in diversionary tactics when information is being sought, they turn the tables on the questioners, etc. Please try not to accuse those of us attempting to get information and sort it out of being "Republicans".

This is difficult enough for some of us. :-) Thanks.

[Boredtodeath]

29. Bingo!

That's EXACTLY what is happening.

What's amazing is that these folks (APN) endorsed Scott Holcomb's opponent. One has to wonder how much that opponent paid them to write this trash.

Dig deep folks.

[Cookie wookie]

38. I don't know about the "swiftboating"

but I do know that Georgians for Verified Voting has called for the decertification of Diebold in Georgia, and gotten traction on that call, which makes their voice very threatening to some powerful people. They've stood like David against Goliath in Georgia. Add to that, they've been a voice of reason, refused to become embroiled in the political infighting going on between Cox and Taylor, but kept to the issue of verified voting, and made every effort to disseminate information that is factual, accurate and that brings a strong case for the need for secure and verifiable elections in Georgia.

So now some people who should be supporting them and the other organizations mentioned, are instead working a smear campaign.

Who needs facts when "truthiness" works so well? I would hope that those who have critical thinking skills would take the time to use them before jumping on the "suspicion" bandwagon.

In this country we have laws. We have the rule of law. What's so important about that is the principle that we are all presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Of course people gossip, it's human nature, but it represents a failure to live up to our higher selves, the best we can be. Playing morality police and sitting in judgment of our fellows has its satisfactions but also extracts a high price on all the players, both the judges and the judged.

Those of us who are fighting for our democracy, for the rule of law, as I hope are those who wrote and defend that article, have to be extremely sensitive to fair play, facts, and objectivity when presuming to judge our fellows. Because we've facing enormous political threats to our system of government, we have to model the very character and nature of democracy in our daily lives or at least make every effort to aim for that lofty goal.

A retraction and mea culpa would be in order from APN and from those who subscribe to the behavior that article exemplifies.

[rman]

34. one big happy family of con-artists

[Cookie wookie]

36. The title of your thread

says "wife co-founds and funds Election Reform Organization". What evidence do you have that Curling "funds" Georgians for Verified Voting (GAVV) http://www.gaforverifiedvoting.org? The website says "there are no dues or fees" to join the group. There is nothing on the website that solicits funds. So, I think it's fair to ask for proof of that "funding"? Would you please present it here?

Actually, since I'm very familiar with the group this article attempts to smear, I know you can't present any proof because there is none, except maybe for the $30 a year paid for the website server, which is the group's only expense other than that members make copies of handouts at their own expense.

Also I would suggest that "Election Reform Organization" is misleading. It appears the organizations mentioned are not out to reform elections but rather to make elections secure, transparent, accurate and verifiable.

As far as the article in Atlanta Progressive News goes, it reads like a gossip column. I'm surprised it even got posted on DU.

[Boredtodeath]

37. Cookie, it's just typical DU bullshit

They take tremendous leaps of logic and make that their truth.

None of it even has to be true, just in case you hadn't noticed.

And, I say again.......APN endorsed Angela Moore. How much did she pay them for that piece of gossip?

[Kelvin Mace]

49. This kind of activism operates

mostly without money, with people donating their time and talents. The impact on reform seems inversly proportional to the money raised, with the groups raising no money actually having an impact.

I, too, am awaiting the evidence. Like you, I won't hold my breath.

[raincity_calling]

69. Attacks on Paul Lehto, Greg Palast, Bev Harris

I rarely come out to DU because the site is so huge that it is
hard for me to find particular topics.  I did stumble upon
this thread and immediately became appalled by the personal
attacks. I thought the point of DU was to share data and
opinions in a tolerant way? Your bullying and personal attacks
remind me of everything that turns me off by the the trolls
and freepers that infiltrate other blog sites. I can't believe
your vicious attacks on patriots such as Paul Lehto, Greg
Palast and Bev Harris.  Sure, there are some issues with Bev
Harris, but she is courageous and if it were not for Bev, we
would not even know about the problems and corruption in our
elections as a result of the electronic voting and counting
machines. Without Greg, we would never know about the massive
voter suppression tactics being used by the GOP. And who among
you, like Paul, are spending your time and money to file
lawsuits against election officials, e-voting vendors,and
travelling around the country to assist recount efforts in
other states? I live in Seattle and have arranged to have both
Paul and Bev come and speak at various forums. They are always
willing, regardless of whether there will be 2 people or 200
people, to talk to groups, for free.  These people are
passionate about protecting our democracy and are doing what
most Americans are too lazy and to self-absorbed to do,which
is actively fighting to protect and save our democracy.  I
find Paul, Bev and Greg inspiring. I think your personal
attacks on these people is pathetic. We are losing our country
-- it has been taken over by a group of corrupt, war-loving
fascists.  If you want to save our country, quit the
infighting and the tearing down of people who are dedicating
their lives to save this country. 

[Kurovski]

70. IMO, you can't compare Lehto, Palast and Harris as being equal.

Harris has burned many a bridge, with Kieth Olbermann, Randi Rhodes, and many donors (myself included.) Her behavior has served to destroy trust.

Her finances are questionable, as you can easily see by perusing threads here on this forum.

Individuals who worked for her have been burned, her behavior during Andy Stephenson's illness was execrable. Near to inhuman.

There is evidence that she is an opportunist, having charmlessly sold cigars online which were designed to be evocative of the Clinton scandal. She profited from the political hysteria created by Republicans that so damaged our nation during that period.

It is my understanding that she has received money from Diebold, even if it was from a lawsuit. Where has that money gone?

Any good she has done would appear--only my opinion--to have been to garner enough trust in order to divide and discredit the reform community.

Ms. Harris, no matter what work her organization may do, is best held at arms length. And the longer the arms, the better.

It is a matter of trust. Trust is earned through behavior and action.

Lehto and Palast--again, IMO-- are no where near to the low-grade class in which Harris apparently operates.

[flyingobject]

61. Maybe the title of the thread should be: "Slander ...

The thread is titled incorrectly and is seriously misleading.

[Boredtodeath]

63. Amazing, isn't it?

I will never understand why people in this movement think it's OK to slander and libel other activists.

I've been in many movements, and never seen this kind of shit.

[Boredtodeath]

39. Title of the thread should be 'Bev Harris tries to kill competition'

THAT is what this shit is all about.

VTUSA and Bev Harris must be competing for the same grant money again.

[katinmn]

55. I think you could be right. I hope people don't jump to conclusions

before all the facts are in. VoteTrust USA is highly regarded. Andy Stephenson was one of the founders. Further, I see that Bev Harris was a source for the Atlanta Progressive News article. For anyone with any history here, you must know there was and remains bad blood between Andy's supporters and Harris. After all the crap Harris has pulled, I would not be surprised if she didn't set out to discredit VoteTrustUSA.

Landshark wrote: "VoteTrust USA Election activists from Votetrustusa.org go out of their way to attack prominent investigative journalist Greg Palast" Can someone show us where this occured?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=440200&mesg_id=440200

According to Joan at VoteTrust:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1643855&mesg_id=1644312
Warren, Susan and I (who speak for VTUSA) knew nothing at all about it (on edit: it being the Georgia article)until it was published. We weren't contacted, we weren't told about it and we wouldn't have engaged in the behavior described if we had been. John was apparently called (though the rest of us didn't hear about it until the article was posted last week) but he certainly didn't defend ChoicePoint or say anything at all about Mr. Palast.

I don't know who is critiquing Mr. Palast's work to reporters or in public, but we have not done so at any time. Nor have we ever defended ChoicePoint as a company or the work they do. The only posts in these vitriol-filled threads that represent VoteTrustUSA are the two in Paul's thread that I posted under my longtime DU screen name of heddafoil and signed in my own name.

[diva77]

58. I am trying to figure something out. I asked what citizen groups would

bid on audits and have not yet received an answer. Meanwhile, my mind has been wandering and it occurred to me that a group such as VoteTrust may bid on doing audits. Is this what Rush Holt was referring to in the above posted quote (post #14) :

"H.R. 550 does not open the door to EAC contracting. Rather, it limits the EAC’s already existing power to do so by requiring public bidding on all contracts. This makes it possible for established citizen groups (perhaps such as your own) to bid for audit contracts. This is exactly what we want: regular citizens protecting the integrity of our elections. If we left it to the states to do audits, the results would be as we’ve seen in the past."

Are any "citizens groups", including VoteTrust interested in bidding on auditing contracts?

I am asking because I have seen so little discussion of the audit component and emphasis on the paper ballot component of HR550.

Again, if the audit is the last chance to catch irregularities, etc. shouldn't we be paying some attention to this part of the bill?

[flyingobject]

62. I don't think anyone should bid, here is what would work

the language should be changed in markup to ensure
that private companies do not do the audits.

Election officials and or appointees from the different parties
should do the audits, just the way recounts are done now.

It is a small price to pay.
The audits aren't so big that they require organizations to bid.

That being said, I support HR 550 but will email Michelle Mulder
to ask her to see what can be done.

[diva77]

71. An audit in a large county is a huge task. And large counties have power

to swing state and federal elections.

[Cookie wookie]

65. When the bill was being written was the time to make

comments and changes. If there are calibrations that need to be made, and certainly the audit provisions are a point of contention, then maybe they could be made in committee or later.

[Kelvin Mace]

68. Also, the individual states have control of this

It is EASIER for activists to influence state officials than Federal.

[Kelvin Mace]

67. In our state

an audit is mandatory, and carried out by election officials, tough it is open to the public. I intend to sit in on some this Fall.

As to what public groups might do this, I can't say.

Again, I have little problem with a licensed, bonded firm of CPAs conducting such an audit. As long as the folks bidding for the audit, conduct the audit publicly, and are a neutral party, then I don't really see a problem.