Yeah John, I was hounding the St Pete times to cover this story, but was disapointed with the shit they came up with, they must have a neo-con in the house

It reminded me of when they printed the Clint Curtis story, all about how great Feeney is (his side only), they wrote another fluff piece then, too

Oh well, better than nothing I guess

Even tho the voting machine hackability issue is a great story, in terms of votes effected, the gerrymandering cases are greater stories.

Think about the votes that are "flipped" by gerrymandering voting districts.

It is so serious that a case is before the US Supreme Court concerning the gerrymandering Tom DeLay forced upon the state of Texas.

You liberal commies want to blame your shortcomings on DieBold.

When are you going to learn your woes are lousy candidates like the abortion loving John Kerry and the dyke, Hillary Clinton?

DieBold is a perfectly good system to tally votes and to blame a machine for why you keep loosing elections is a riot.

God bless America and God bless George Bush!

Now, come visit my blog and see what all the noise is about --- a 385lbs. drag queen who is mentally ill and thinks she's Annie Lennox.

You liberal commies want to blame your shortcomings on DieBold.

When are you going to learn your woes are lousy candidates like the abortion loving John Kerry and the dyke, Hillary Clinton?

DieBold is a perfectly good system to tally votes and to blame a machine for why you keep loosing elections is a riot.

God bless America and God bless George Bush!

Now, come visit my blog and see what all the noise is about --- a 385lbs. drag queen who is mentally ill and thinks she's Annie Lennox.

No story in the Iraq vote. Why arent you covering it Brad? Is the historic vote not a big enough story? That cant be since you feature comedy show skits on your blog?

Why no coverage?

In the American Constitutional form of government, we do NOT vote for the most valuable essences of our freedom, liberty, and democracy.

Those great values are written down in the Bill of Rights, and other Amendments to our constitution. They are the foundation and we do not vote on those issues. They are settled law and should only be allowed to increase in value and scope.

Remember, voting is NOT the most important aspect of our government. If you read the voting structure in the US Constitution you will find that there is no federal right to vote for president, for instance.

Earlier on there was no right to vote for congress members either. Yep, voting is a lesser value than the rights written down and guaranteed in the constitution.

It took me a while to see how important that is, and I rejoiced to know that voting machines good or bad cannot take those rights from me.

The neoCons and the neoConvicts are using the word "democracy" in the press a lot, the neoCon president and neoCon vice president being major users of the term.

But I found a website where some of their underling neoCons have this to say about "democracy":

"America’s founders knew this to be true because they had studied the history of democracies and discovered that they inevitably destroyed both the morals and liberties of the people. If the modern-day drive for democracy in the nation continues, the American people will experience a similar fate." (link here, at page 6 "Conclusion", emphasis added).

Note that Tom Feeney is one of the members of this committee which names itself "The Liberty Committee" and says democracy destroys both liberty and morals. These guys are good buds of the neoCon president and vice president.

They must be speaking from experience, having lost their morals, however I do not think that blaming democracy is the solution to their moral dilemna.

So I urge everyone to not give up the fight because a few elections are stolen, keep up the fight and lets further clean up America turning neoCons into neoConvicts as it should be.

And adding fair, open, and honest elections to our list of values.

For Medium Right: Something isn't "historic" until history renders its judgment about the event. For you to suggest that the Iraqi vote is historic is rank speculation, and not even intelligent speculation at that.

This isn't the first time Iraqis have voted since we invaded, you know. Since the first vote, which was also described as "historic," the rate of violence has STEADILY INCREASED.

Vietnam held a series of elections during the period of our military adventure there. None made any difference one way or the other, either in our goals or in the life of the average Vietnamese citizen. All those elections were called historic, too...but I doubt there's a historian anywhere who could tell you when the votes were held, or who won.

Don't believe everything Bush tells you. Please.

Medium Right - If you want to read Iraqi comentary from someone who actually knows what he's talking about (which is NOT the MSM) then you should check out www.juancole.com

Here is a response to your "Iraq vote" from his blog:

The LA Times probably reflects the thinking of a lot of Americans in hoping that these elections are a milestone on the way to withdrawing US troops from Iraq. I cannot imagine why anyone thinks that. The Iraqi "government" is a failed state. Virtually no order it gives has any likelihood of being implemented. It has no army to speak of and cannot control the country. Its parliamentarians are attacked and sometimes killed with impunity. Its oil pipelines are routinely bombed, depriving it of desperately needed income. It faces a powerful guerrilla movement that is wholly uninterested in the results of elections and just wants to overthrow the new order. Elections are unlikely to change any of this.

The only way in which these elections may lead to a US withdrawal is that they will ensconce parliamentarians who want the US out on a short timetable. Virtually all the Sunnis who come in will push for that result (which is why the US Right is silly to be all agog about Fallujans voting), and so with the members of the Sadr Movement, now a key component of the Shiite religious United Iraqi Alliance. That is, these elections lead to a US withdrawal on terms unfavorable to the Bush administration. Nor is there much hope that a parliament that kicked the US out could turn around and restore order in the country.

Off Topic: We are now officially a police state. I don't know how Bush could defend spying on Americans...but he did. And now he claims that the press that the spy-activity is getting is "endangering Americans." And the conservaties still won't admit that we are living in a fascist dictatorship: faulty elections, spying on the citizens, corruption tied to corporations, dishonest government (to a degree never seen before.) Let the revolution begin....

http://www.comcast.net/n...=/2005/12/17/286058.html

Next thought on spying (still OT, sorry):
Since this is going to affect Bush's poll numbers (which were supposedly rising)...how long until we hear of another suspected terrorist plot on America? Every time the administration takes a hit, we hear of something. The last time was Oct. 12 when the big rumor was possible indictment of Karl Rove: suddenly we have information about a terrorist plot on the NYCity subway. When the torture pictures came out in May '04 and Bush's polls went down Ashcroft warned of an impending terrorist plot. Before the midterm elections in '02, the threat level was raised to orange for the first time (Sep) "for no specific threat"...why?

This administration uses fear as a weapon against Americans...will they catch on this time if we hear of a terrorist threat within the next week or so?