If conservatives, of the William F. Buckley sort, could have the mental and emotional strength to face the notion that election systemic problems within the US are as much a failure as they say Iraq is, what would their view be?

That shock and awe is really awe shit?

Buckley said:

``Mr. Bush is in the hands of a fortune that will be unremitting on the point of Iraq,'' Buckley said in an interview that will air on Bloomberg Television this weekend. ``If he'd invented the Bill of Rights it wouldn't get him out of his jam.'' (link here).

And we know that inventing the Bill of Wrongs is really what this regime has in mind.

So the word "failure", akin to "incompetent", is likely the word history will use to describe this regime's "skills".

LUNCH WITH CLINT CURTIS
Candidate for U.S. Congress - District 24

Clint wil take on Tom Feeney and Katherine Harris

Valencia Gardens
811 W. Kennedy Blvd.
Tampa, FL
813.253.3773

Tuesday, April 4, 2006
11:30am - 1:00pm

Suggested donation is $10.00 pp

Featuring a performance by folk singer Jim Glover, author of : "I'm An Old Voting Machine"

We encourage all citizens to attend this event and learn how OUR DEMOCRACY was stolen. We will take it back,,,by making sure Clint Curtis is on the ballot!

Please make sure to visit his campaign
website at www.clintcurtis.com and contribute what you can. See you at the luncheon!

Please RSVP for the Clint Curtis luncheon:
Karen Landers - res831gk@... or call 863-299-7474
Lauren Hallahan - hallahanfl@... or call 727-447-8366

We will all be ordering individual lunches from the menu. Those who wish to donate but are unable to order lunch are welcome to attend!

See you there!

Great Invitation to support Clint Curtis for Congress. Brad Friedman did a great job promoting him. John Gideon will appreciate this man fighting for our fair elections.

The strange thing is I did a google search on Clint Curtis and Al Rogers. This is weird and so typical of Florida politics. Play both sides of the fence. These two men are rotten to the core.

This was found on on the net.

Since the CSPAN telecast on 12/8/04 our
investigators have come up with evidence
of Clint Curtis, Congressman Tom Feeney,
Dr. Piotr Blass and Sean Lennon
(the informant,xxx) whom each had taken
a part in having Al Gore lose in 2000 and
John Kerry in 2004. This information was
obtained by electronic (cell phone) conversations in November and December between Dr. Piotr Blass and Sean Lennon.

Are we going to be STUPID again and elect a supposed reformed computer programmer who took part in cheating America for Bush.

I think NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who else is this guy Rogers helping?

I have learned that he is a website developer. If there is anybody out there he is developing for, BEWARE this man is dangerous.

There is something worse than Bush, Its NEOCONS, especially the ones who pose as Democrats.

This Rogers posts in liberal web groups.

Did you all know that Al Rogers supports Hillary Clinton opinions and voting record supporting the war and parts of the Patriot Act.

That is the act of a two faced hood.

Sarah Mayfield #2

You said "The strange thing is I did a google search on Clint Curtis and Al Rogers. This is weird and so typical of Florida politics. Play both sides of the fence. These two men are rotten to the core. "

You only mention Clint and Al and then say both are rotten ... huh? Did you mean to say Dr. Piotr Blass and Sean Lennon are rotten?

Yeah, that was weird Dredd

Sarah,
Glad I'm not the only one confused by your post. Please correct it to the point that Dredd made.

BTW, I am of the opinion that all votes matter. NO MATTER if your guy wins or not. Participation is the key. Taking votes away from people is wrong, no matter if the person is a minority or if the person is a military overseas voter (like what Martin county Democrats attempted to do, even going to court over it).

Therefore, I disagree with the graphic on this site:

Just because your guy lost does not mean that you can say that and be correct. Yes, you have allegations of tampering in Florida 2000, but you have no proof.

I hope that the electronic voting machine companies clean up their act and make a system that we all can agree with. I'll even agree that we need a paper receipt, just like what I get when I pay for my gas at the pump.

Well, most of the time anyway. Lately a lot of the pumps are out of paper or printer not working so I have to go inside.... but I digress. You get the point that I would also like to see paper receipts on electronic voting systems.

Have a nice day!

BREAKING

See BBV's early rush transcripts from Sen. Debra Bowen's Senate Elections Committee hearing here.

So far the first 2 segments are up and there should be another one coming soon.

Bowen's well-prepared questioning elicits some revealing information from 2 of the ITAs whose companies test voting machines.

Actually Michael J., there is plenty of proof and considerable testimony that shows that election was cheated.

Also you should know that Sarah was probably talking about Al Rogers & Clint Curtis, when she said play both sides of the fence.

There's a file on those guys that is two miles long!

Utah hero Bruce Funk (who bravely had his county's Diebold TSx voting machines independently tested) has posted to a forum with an article about his situation. He's volunteered to answer any questions. His son has also posted about why his dad has done what he did.

He mentions a mock election where 1/3 of the machines failed (same failure rate for both the Diebold and ES&S DREs). This is the first I've heard about this.

Might be a good opportunity to voice your support and ask any questions you might have. You have to register in order to post but I think it's worth doing.

Bruce Funk's post is here. You can also read the original story here.

Mike J #5

"Just because your guy lost does not mean that you can say that and be correct. Yes, you have allegations of tampering in Florida 2000, but you have no proof."

That is a straw man argument. No one challenges an election result simply because they lost.

Take republican Steve Smith for example (link here). He is challenging because for the past two elections he won by landslides in places he got ZERO votes this election cycle.

Please be above the juvenile level when you raise these questions here, where some of the brightest in election facts and figures blog and lurk. That is if you really want to appear as a member of reality.

Next you raise the time worn lame "proof" argument. That word is meaningless to those who do not understand the laws and principles of evidence.

Proof is something a jury or judge produces, those making and argument one way or the other only produce evidence. The jury, thru deliberation, produces proof by choosing which evidence is the correct evidence and branding it as such.

There is ample, competent, scientific, and compelling evidence that the official Florida presidential elections results were seriously in error. Like juries, people make up their minds based upon factors that are not legitimate evidence, such as presumption and bias.

The main evidence used to monitor the validity of elections for many decades has been the scientific and reliable exit poll:

"Exit polling is a well-developed science, informed by half a century of experience and continually improving methodology" (link here, p. 7, bold added).

The general United States population simply does not and cannot handle the notion that election fraud on a grande scale can happen here, and therefore the issue that an election may have been stolen is not considered by mainstream exit polling personalities:

"Inaccurate Election Results

Edison/Mitofsky did not even consider this hypothesis, and thus made no effort to contradict it. Some of Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data may be construed as affirmative evidence for inaccurate election results. We conclude that the hypothesis that the voters’ intent was not accurately recorded or counted cannot be ruled out and needs further investigation (ibid, p. 3).

That means that there is a fundamental, unscientific, and damaging presumption that all elections are valid no matter what the figures are.

The only scientific evidence that has been used for decades to predict and confirm election results has been the exit poll. When one assumes that there can be no fraud, and the exit polls clearly show something is wrong, there should be no reluctance to investigate, no pre-existing bias that overrides such an investigation.

Nevertheless, that is the state of elections in this nation today, and for the past 6 years.

Dredd #9,

Or is it RANDY?

You said:
Please be above the juvenile level when you raise these questions here, where some of the brightest in election facts and figures blog and lurk. That is if you really want to appear as a member of reality.

I'll be happy to stay above the juvenile level as long as you do. I don't start the juvenile insult chain here, you do. Perhaps that's part of your personality. So if you claim to be such an intellectual, then you might remember that the best intellectuals present their arguments without insulting the other side. When you restort to insults, you've lost the intellectual argument.

I looked at your website, it was interesting. I didn't have time to read it all, though.

The exit poll company, Voter News Service, was hired by all the MSM companies. They were so far off that they were ridiculed. Exit polls have been used for a long time, but have they always been accurate? I really don't know. Why don't you show me some more of your intellect and tell me that?

So a bunch of university scholars, statisticians, and liberal groups that claim to be non-partisian get together and write a report about the election. Wow, it's really commendable for them and you to "continue the fight" against what you think was a stolen election. But why does the recipient of your efforts not fight for it too? Why is there nothing else heard from Sen.Kerry on this? Please tell me what you think about his silence.

Remember this number: 3,012,497. That's Three Million Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Seven

That's the number by which Pres.Bush defeated Sen.Kerry in the popular vote of 2004:CNN link

Do you and that group propose that the vote was tampered with by that much? Wow. I'd like to see that proof, err.... I mean EVIDENCE that can be viewed by a jury.

I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on the internet. So when I say "proof" then I say it in layman's terms. Are you a lawyer or an artist? Or both? I have been on jury duty before, but at the end the judge told me that I was the alternate juror! So I didn't get to go into the jury room for deliberations.

From the report you cite:
"Many have questioned whether this process was in itself sinister, designed to conceal troubling questions about vote counting in Election 2004 as revealed by the unadjusted exit poll results. The answer is almost certainly no. And yet the effect of the process was at the very least confusing and served to blunt public awareness of the dramatic exit poll-vote count discrepancies during the critical period immediately following the election." --- (p. 20)

So those of you here that think Pres.Bush and his people stole the elction. This group of intellectuals thinks that though the vote was incorrect, it was not intentional.

Read the first two paragraphs of the Summary on p.22. Do they use the word proof in a way you don't like? They say that the burden of proof is on the election process. So perhaps in a liberal world they describe the 2004 election process as "guilty until proven innocent" or "wrong until proven right". I'm sure that you will tell me where you think I'm wrong.

Have a nice day!

ydicwsdx [URL=http://hhltjrmv.com]krecpaxd[/URL] asjzwpna http://lgfecnaq.com bxdexqwd azvfjkys

wrsajove omxbgtdz http://agylhizy.com djzjddfz tkftffol

bnhpxkcz kxzaewgt http://ckduzviw.com amxhymxf iwwzkccs

chaowhnv osyhqoxa http://nnmxymxr.com tnevfjos bcdhnnnf

dyfpartn znturmno http://npnuataz.com iyjdlwca sxalpopv