No Confidence Movement in Eureka, CA Newspaper (MSM)

[GuvWurld]

The Eureka Times-Standard published an opinion piece today on supporting the No Confidence Resolution. Such pieces normally appear on the paper's website, and the editor assured me this would too. But since it is only available in print thus far I invite you to read it in the GuvWurld blog:

http://guvwurld.blogspot.com/2005/01/building-confidence-through-election.html

Ensuring every vote counts is a service to society. It is also a very tall order. Many thousands of "glitches" and "irregularities" arose in our last two presidential elections. How many times will this repeat before they are considered regularities?

Many aspects of our current electoral system ensure a shroud of uncertainty will taint future elections. Consider whether private corporations should own voting machines. The purpose of a corporation is to make money for shareholders. This motive has caused more than a few corporations to behave unethically. By keeping the source code of voting machines a secret, and also by denying a voter-verified permanent paper record of one's vote, the motive to manipulate an election is accompanied by the means.

Motive and means are usually joined by opportunity. Consider whether it is appropriate for votes to be tallied in seclusion, with the media and other observers explicitly barred from the room. This happened in Ohio. Opportunity also exists simply by virtue of the machines in use, regarded unequivocally by computer scientists as highly susceptible to tampering.

It is not my intention to argue that fraud was or was not committed in the most recent election. Many have tried due to the large number of statistical anomalies including lost data, negative vote totals, tallies equaling more votes than there are registered voters, and persistent automatic vote swapping from a voter's chosen candidate to an opponent. Apparently, the numbers alone just don't cut it. Many prominent people with much to gain by challenging the legitimacy of the outcome have instead shied away for lack of hard evidence. Is it irony, then, that in many places there is also no hard evidence to demonstrate how voters voted?

Read the rest

[PROGRESSIVE1]

1. ..

[fooj]

2. Empowering read!

The power is in the magic of the message! Integrity, Truth and Honor. Nothing more. Nothing less. If this fraudulent election stands unchallenged, the citizens of this country will perform their patriotic duties and demand a No Confidence Resolution be passed. I think it speaks volumes. B-)

[GuvWurld]

3. Direct Link to Eureka Times-Standard Website

http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127~2906~2655408,00.html

[GuvWurld]

4. Kick (eom)

[GuvWurld]

6. Kick (eom)

[GetTheRightVote]

5. great reporting - No confidence sounds very good because its true

:kick:

[Wilms]

7. I like the recommendations.

-snip-

At present, conditions do not exist for US federal elections to be considered beyond question. Even if you have never doubted before, a close examination of the American electoral system provides no explicit reason to believe it is truly measuring the will of the people. Borrowing from the spirit of Arcata's "Building Confidence Resolution," passed last July, here are eight changes that would collectively create a new basis for confidence and allow us to build faith in American democracy:

1) all private corporations are divested of ownership in election machines, and

2) clean money laws keep all corporate funds out of campaign financing, and

3) any future mechanisms for voting conform to a uniform national standard and produce a verifiable audit trail for every vote, and

4) all votes are cast on the same day, designated as a national holiday, with the exception of absentee ballots which will be granted to applicants meeting a narrow list of federally determined criteria, and

5) all votes are counted publicly in the presence of citizen witnesses and credentialed members of the media, and

6) equal time provisions are observed by the media along with a measurable increase in local, public control of the airwaves, and

7) presidential debates contain a minimum of three candidates, and are run by a non-partisan commission comprised of representatives of publicly owned media outlets, and

8) instant runoff voting (see H.R. 5293) and proportional representation replace the winner-take-all system for federal elections;

[DearAbby]

8. Kick n/t

[GuvWurld]

9. Kick (eom)

[GuvWurld]

10. Kick (eom)