Lots more from Minnesota today. The Coleman lawyers have rested and now it is the Franken camp’s turn to present their case. They claim they will not take as much time as Coleman’s side. Time will tell....

Guest Blogged by Andi T. Novick, Esq.

New York is the last state in the nation to have a non-computerized, transparent voting system. We still use immutable, theft-deterring mechanical lever machines to count our votes. (* - Please seen bottom of this article for a quick explanation of how lever machines work, for those who may not know.)

New Yorkers are fighting to keep their current voting system, notwithstanding that New York's legislature passed a law in 2005 that says we should give up our observable, reliable levers in exchange for unreliable, concealed software-based vote counting machines. Nearly 1,800 New Yorkers have signed a petition, and three counties (Dutchess, Ulster, and Columbia, all PDFs), have passed resolutions to save New York's lever voting system.

The Association of Towns (half of New York's entire population lives in towns) recently passed a resolution to save the levers [PDF], and Nassau, Greene, and other counties are presently considering similar action to retain New York's lever voting system.

Moreover, reliable sources have confirmed for me that neither the Governor nor the Attorney General nor the State Legislature that passed the "Election Reform and Modernization Act" (ERMA) want to replace the levers anymore either (what politician would want to be responsible for choosing to cut essential programs for hungry children or the elderly, just to be able to replace our superior and affordable voting system with budget-breaking computers that are notoriously corruptible and defective?). But the State Legislature has not repealed ERMA and the Attorney General, to date, has supported the State (not the citizens).

So what is driving New York State to stick with a law that so many in New York believe to be such a bad idea? As a New Yorker who has been talking to many election commissioners, legislators and citizens, I was surprised to learn how many people believe the "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA) actually banned lever machines.

I read HAVA. It clearly does not ban levers. I recently discovered what has helped fuel this misinformed opinion in part: it is the discredited position of the discredited U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), as detailed in a newly-unearthed document prepared for the state of Pennsylvania, at their request, in regard to the legality of lever voting machines.

Although the agency is not a court of law, and not even an agency deserving of deference for its opinions --- its allegiance has clearly been shown to be not with either voters or democracy --- the "HAVA-banned-levers" rumor was given the imprimatur of the EAC through this little-noticed document...

You, yes you, can put us on the air, three hours a day, five days a week, originating out of San Francisco's great Green960 (KKGN)!

All you have to do is vote for us right here!

They're adding a new show in the 4p-7p PT slot, and we'd be delighted to do what we do here every day --- take names, kick asses, make you laugh, report what nobody else does and much more! --- on the worldwide airwaves every day Monday through Friday!

I'm told by a little birdie that, in this election, "stacking the deck" is encouraged. Seriously, I'm told you guys can make it happen, if you're loud enough,. So do what ya gotta do! Go vote now! Spread the word. Then go vote again!

It has been a very slow news weekend. Hope it was good for you....

It appears that Florida is going to join the growing list of states that are thinking about using Internet voting for their military and overseas voters. This is a terrible idea that will end-up costing the tax payers of the state millions of dollars to stand-up the scheme and then millions more each year for licensing. One vendor’s proposal of the scheme would cost WA State’s 39 counties up to $570 per affected voter per year. So, any state falling for these con-jobs will end up paying millions of tax payer dollars for an insecure means of getting ballots back from UOCAVA voters. There are low-tech solutions that should be investigated before we go high-tech....

Guest blogged by Brad Jacobson of MediaBloodhound

In a primer on how to conduct an interview relying almost solely on Republican talking points, PBS NewsHour anchor Judy Woodruff discussed the new budget plan with White House Budget Director Peter Orszag on Wednesday night.

Woodruff's first question isn't necessarily a Republican talking point, but it might as well be.

Seriously, members of the mainstream media need to stop acting like they suddenly have the vapors over big government spending. The Republicans weren't the only ones to preside over the most reckless spending in our government's history over the last eight years, on a war of choice and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans in an environment of profligate deregulation and zero investment in infrastructure and our citizens' future. Mainstream news outlets and their anchors and talking heads watched it all unfold while expressing little or no concern at the time.

Woodruff's second question is like a GOP talking-point smorgasbord...