Great Article in today's St. Pete Times - Adam C. Smith - Feeney, etc..

[bj2110]

I haven't seen any reference to this article published in the print version of today's St. Pete Times. Forgive me if this is a dupe. It was buried in a back section, but I thought it was superb. I also can't find an online copy of this anywhere, can anyone else find it? I've googled & checked the Times website, but with no luck.

Regardless, the article starts with describing the effort of a few Pinellas county citizens who got a chance to test out a few select touchscreen voting machines a few weeks back. They pre-loaded a bunch of pre-determined votes & checked the machine count against their own. It matched exactly. However, Smith then goes directly into the paperless record and that this method is unacceptable. He mentions many of the Ohio irregularities and the partisan nature of many election officials. He even goes on at length regarding Feeney, Curtis & Yang. This wasn't painted as conspiracist or dismissed in any way. Sounds like he even interviewed Curtis. The conclusion was that the system is broke and needs to be investigated. I was impressed. I don't remember seeing much about the Conyers hearings or the Arnebeck lawsuit, but it sounds like this guy has been exposed to (and even reported on) many of the things discussed daily here at DU.

Hopefully this will be online soon. Let me know if anyone else can find this.

<edited for typos, etc...>

[jsamuel]

1. woot!

[bj2110]

2. My e-mail to the author.... email [e-mail]

Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:39:55 -0800 (PST)
From: xxxxx
Subject: Today's Voting Column
To: [e-mail]

Mr Smith:

I'd like to commend you on your column printed in
today's Times. I have been following this story on my
own for quite some time now, and I believe your
account of the issue at hand was both fair and
un-biased. I have been greatly concerned over our
election process since 11/2 because of a variety of
seemingly suspicious activities and facts. In this
article, you have given a good once over on many of
these items. I would like to see more coverage of this
topic, and would love to see your take on items such
as the exit poll discrepancies (See Stephen Freeman's
or the Berkeley paper), the Conyers hearings (which
have been painted as partisan although the Republican
majority declined to attend), and the Cliff Arnebeck
lawsuit being filed tomorrow, Monday 12/13. Thanks for
your efforts on this. I am eagerly awaiting your next
article on this subject.

One last thing, I cannot find an online version of
this story. Is one available? Can you send me a copy?
Thanks again.

- BJ Nichols
Clearwater

[troubleinwinter]

5. Excellent!!!!!! Let's hang on to this guy's name.

[clarisse1956]

3. I cancelled my subscription the other day

Told them it was because they were not covering any of the election fraud. The woman said she would relay my comments to the Politcal Department. Maybe if enough of us cancel then we can get more coverage of the election fraud

[bj2110]

4. Well, Smith is the Political Editor.. Maybe he heard your call... n/t

[bj2110]

6. kick to find this online

[bj2110]

7. .

[EMunster]

8. kick in hopes it's found