The OC Weekly’s Matt Coker picked up on my Monday report describing my experience over the weekend at the Orange County Registrar’s booth at the Orange County Fair wherein my attempt to try out their 100% unverifiable Hart Intercivic electronic voting system, um, didn’t work out too well.
Coker’s amusing take on the apparent system failure that occurred while I was testing it out with assistance from employees of the OC Registrar’s office is described as “akin to making an illegal U-turn in front of a motorcycle cop. … or letting it slip to ‘Woodstein’ that Tricky Dick audio taped everything in the Oval Office.”
His coverage is much briefer than mine. So if you’ve yet to read my account of what happened and want a more-to-the-point version, please see Coker’s piece.
For the record, for those who’ve asked, no, I’ve yet to hear back from either OC Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley or from anyone at CA Sec. of State Debra Bowen’s office about what happened on Sunday. I’ve contacted all them via email, with a link to my original article, seeking comment. If I hear back from any of them substantively, of course, I’ll let you know.
You’re kind of a twat on twitter. Just sayin’
So, OC is called “very Republican” despite the fact that the true votes there are not available? How manipulated are the results from that county?
The one problem I had with the Coker piece was his assertion that Brad is “best known for examining (and damning) ballot-counting machines in the U.S. from a progressive perspective.”
Tell that to the likes of Joe Miller (R-AK), whose challenge of that state’s unverified results was supported by Brad.
Brad has repeated the point so many times that it has become a mantra. “It’s not about Left or Right. It’s about right-or-wrong!”
Decemberism – Lovely. And intelligent input. But, by all means, don’t bother to even mention what you’re actually referring to. Calling people ugly names behind the veil of pseudonymity is both very impressive and very courageous.
Boswell:
A fair enough point to make, though my assertions there are based on voter registrations, if not vote counts.
Sadly, we have no way of knowing.
Ernie said:
I mentioned as much to him via email, and also in a comment on the item. He has corrected that in an update on the article, if you want to re-check it out.
He also adds in his update that he’s attempting to get comment from the OC Registrar since, so far, I’ve been unable to get one.
Should be interesting 🙂
Pleased to see that Coker has no qualms about publicly correcting an error in an update.
Perhaps we should get him to give the editors at The New York Times a primer on journalistic integrity.
Coker is a hack for using the word “irregardless”, which isn’t a word. Is he still in high school?
It IS a word. It IS in the dictionary. It is not the PREFERRED word, but it is, indeed a word with a specific meaning, so you are mistaken. Just because you don’t like it or disagree that it should be used the way it is does not deny the fact of it being an actual documented word. Irregardless of what some may claim, “irregardless” is a word.
OK, let me retract half my comment. It is a word. You are a hack if you use it.
{Commercial spam. Deleted. -BF}
When did our comment section become an avenue for commercial solicitations?
People who use the word “irregardless” should have their fingertips hit with sticks.
Good lord. A local journalist takes one of our important reports, covers it accurately, transparently and promptly corrects a minor error, promises to try and follow up with local officials, and you guys are dinging him for grammar?!
Wow. Tough crowd!