Democratic Party ties to Voting Machine Makers....

[EMunster]

Today's Editorial in the Indianapolios Star shows at least two things -- that they haven't read the news since Thursday, and that they take the idea of balance so seriously that they're willing to make things up just so one side doesn't look worse than the other.

excerpts:

Make sure voters can count on system

December 20, 2004

Our position is: Americans need assurance that when they go to the polls, their votes will count.

The Ohio Supreme Court's chief justice threw out a challenge to the state's presidential election results last week...

(snip)

So the ongoing recount in Ohio, requested by two minor party candidates, is in many ways pointless.

Yet an autopsy of the election process in Ohio and throughout the nation is still very much needed. It's not a question of changing outcomes. The fact that Bush won by a safe margin can't be seriously questioned.

But the nation's system for casting votes -- which led to unconscionably long lines in Ohio and other states, inaccurate voter registration rolls, inadequate poll-worker training and claims of tampering -- still needs to be dramatically improved. Too many problems with computerized voting machines, especially punch-card and touch-screen systems, remain. Too many companies providing hardware and software for elections have ties to one party or the other...

Huh? "The other."? Do they mean the Democrats? Maybe the editoral board can enlighten us as to which company that might be? Maybe they just need to be corrected.


http://www.indystar.com/articles/3/203450-3413-021.html

Letters to the editor:
http://www.indystar.com/help/contact/letters.html

[Straight Shooter]

1. Naturally, they don't mention the companies or the parties specifically

That would be too much to ask, right?

As far as the ongoing recount being "in many ways pointless," it's time to whip out the masked man: :wtf:

edit, the dreaded typo

[tandem5]

2. yeah I know I hate that balanced has been equated to objectivity...

That's the only way the MSM will report something is if they can claim something on the other side (true or not). Otherwise they just ignore the story.

I swear if Hitler were to go up against a democrat for some political office the media wouldn't report on the Holocaust because they wouldn't be able to report anything on the other side to match it - but hey that's balanced!

[me b zola]

3. typical right-wing sound machine

gearing up for battle. The good news is they're paying attention & getting nervous...the bad news is their hypnotism skills are quite effective :crazy:

[Up2Late]

4. Maybe they are talking about the old stand by's

The Paper Ballot and the Black marking pens, there' bound to be a Democrat that invented or perfected one of those suspicious items :evilgrin:

[gdub]

5. I agree

This is formalistic journalism at its worst. Stupidity, laziness, or partisanship.

[IndyOp]

6. The Star is a rag...

I know this from personal experience.

:puke:

[luaptifer]

7. hey, freepers concern themselves with election fraud

but that was 5 years ago.

i just posted a diary on dKos about an article i discovered that the freeps worried over in prep for 2000. kinda stunning that the article was published in 1996 showing that almost nothing has changed in 8 or 9 years.

but check it out, you'll be amazed at what 'we' knew about then, heck i didn't hear about the blackbox idea til maybe 2002 or so.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/20/7396/2275#1

[merh]

13. I'll give you one better than that:

Check out this report from 1988 - note that the illustrious Tod Rapp was a contributor to this report!

Accuracy, Integrity, and Security in
Computerized Vote-Tallying

Roy G. Saltman

Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology
National Bureau of Standards
Gaithersburg, MD 20899

Sponsored by:
John and Mary R. Markle Foundation
75 Rockefeller Plaza, Suite 1800
New York, NY 10019-6908
August 1988


http://www.itl.nist.gov/lab/specpubs/500-158.htm

[insane_cratic_gal]

20. i just wrote to Roy today

He responded back, but the Todd Rapp, I missed that part. hmmm

Given the concerns I raised and the links I sent to Saltman, over the tabulators, I don't expect he'll respond.

He did do a great deal for research into the code, even if Rapp contributed to it. He still holler about code, and government should be the ones investigating and reviewing it at all times.

If he does write back again, I ask about that.

[merh]

21. Please do. I just find it amazing that this report from 1988 warned

against the incidents that have occurred today. I would love to know what he has to say.

[insane_cratic_gal]

22. His first report

was 1975. But everything he speaks of 16 years ago is so relevant today.

1988 was funded by NIST for which he worked.

I have the report printed up and I've been reading it for the last few nights. I wrote him today out curiosity I high expected his email to bounce back.

Imagine my surprise when he piped in.

I know he contributed to CA reform in 2001 or at least gave testimony.

He has been responsible for removing "pre-score cards" from election proceedings.

My letter to him expressed my own concerns over the past election, and addressing his own voice to DRE's. He is an advocate for them, with a paper trail. And with federal monitoring of code.

Why he is anyway connected to Rap is startling to say the least. I know the 1988 report was given to Us Dept. Commerce.

I still feel he is impartial, but we shall see.

[merh]

23. I don't think he is connected to Rapp. I think he just contacted

Rapp regarding his machines and his experience with voting devices. Rapp was simply a contributor to the 1988 report.

In a court of law, that information comes in handy when cross examining the witness. An attorney would be able to infer a great deal relative to Rapp's knowledge of the vulnerability of the machines and the process. imho

[insane_cratic_gal]

27. Merh I'm going to pm

He wrote back and I could use your help with the questions. he's agreed to do it.

Give an interview that is

[genieroze]

8. Write to them and show them the facts, not that it matters to them.eom

[Pierre de Fermat]

18. Please give me the link to the facts so I can send. Thanks n/t

[Straight Shooter]

19. The links are in post #7 and post #13

The facts are contained within the articles accessed by those links, and in successive posts on this thread.

[genieroze]

28. Where have you been? This whole discussion board is filled with

the facts. Are you knew to reading as well as posting? Some people lurk for awhile before they start posting and others dive right in. There are so many sites and links. Personally I think they are playing dumb on purpose. That's my take on it.

[proudbluestater]

9. Sent my corrections!

:-)

[mod mom]

10. Sent a letter to the Star requesting the names

of the Democratic leaning companies. I stated here in Ohio we have been researching into these companies, and would appreciate if they would share the names of the dem leaning companies controllling the voting process. think they will answer?

[s-cubed]

11. Sent letter: following points

1) agree election process in need of serious reform
2) suit dismissed on a technically, already refiled
3) recount has exposed extent to which people will go to cover their tracks
4) Blackwell's obstructions prima facie evidence of election fraud
5) Triad and Diebold tampering with machines before recount has invalidated the recount

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

12. "one party (Republicans) and the other (neo-con Republicans)"

[abbiehoff]

14. Democratic voting machine

I believe Athan Gibbs may have been a democrat. He invented an electronic machine that could print a paper ballot for counting and receipt for the voter to check later to see how his vote was counted. He died earlier this year when his car was run off the road.

http://www.kccall.com/News/2004/0326/Community/081.html

[newyawker99]

17. Hi abbiehoff!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mod mom]

26. Wouldn't this mean he would have been an expert

on voting machine that could have been used by those prosecuting the election fraud? I forwarded this.

[joeunderdog]

15. This way of describing the problem absolutely helps us.

If you say "ties to Republicans" you lose the support of Repubs for making voting companies non-partisan. It disarms the reader and makes the cause universal/bipartisan, which it is.

This makes Vote Tranparency/Integrety everybody's issue and not some Democrat Sour Grapes campaign.

[Dancing_Dave]

25. I agree!

This will help us get a populist "clean up the elections" campaign going, and give us a reasonable chance of success in key swing states.

[Junkdrawer]

16. LOL. An NPRism...

NPRism: (noun) A way of describing any damning RW scandal as bipartisan. Rationalized as "balance", it's actually a way of preventing attacks from the Right when funding bills come up in Congress.

[MarkusQ]

24. THIS IS GOOD

We need to keep this framed as People-vs-Coruption instead of Republicans-vs-Democrats. First, let people see that it is wrong, agree that it is wrong, then get into which side is doing what.

I'll tell you honestly: as Republican, I would have been much less likely to look at the voting fraud problem in this election if I hadn't first seen it as an abstract problem. I have no great love of Kerry, and frankly wouldn't cross the street to meet him, but I have a deep and abiding love for fair and honest elections.

You can always inject partisan rhetoric into the debate later; for now, let's focus on the non-partiasan need for truth.

--MarkusQ