(no subject)

[unluckystunt.livejournal.com]

Comments

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

One does wonder how Dubya would know what makes a great president, as it would seem to be a total mystery to the man.

[hippopotassium.livejournal.com]

He's THE DECIDER!!!!

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Not a very reassuring thought in our troubled times, is it? ;)

[katndhat33.livejournal.com]

Not a bit.

[katndhat33.livejournal.com]

From Geroge to Jeb? They were right, it CAN get worse.

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

I guess he thinks you can never have too much Bush. I would tend to agree, but not of this variety. I've had about enough of the Bush family for one century.

[studmuff.livejournal.com]

get it? nice joke, fatty

[library-chair.livejournal.com]

studmuff, you fail.

[bluetooth16.livejournal.com]

A Bush Dynasty is not a good idea. I'm not sure if anyone would be receptive to the idea.

[aeonsbeyond.livejournal.com]

I seriously doubt the family gives a fuck if anyone wants them in power or not;
can we say DIEBOLD kids???

[shadowfox24.livejournal.com]

I'm sure they can! And they can say GRASSY KNOLL, FREE MASONS, and AREA 51 too.

[aeonsbeyond.livejournal.com]

Oh of course Im the nut, certainly theres no possiblitity of fraud or any potential tampering at all with the US voting systems by a self admitted partisan corporation. Completely fantastical, yes Im a loony wingnut.

Look if you trust the system its up to you I think its all a fat fucking scam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold_Election_Systems

[ccnuggie.livejournal.com]

Then why exactly has nothing been done to change the voting system? I remember after the 2004 election, people were up in arms, saying they would do whatever they could to get it changed...yet nothing is heard about it now.

Personally, even if it did get changed, liberals would blame something else for their loss instead of realizing that the people just don't agree with their radical views.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

in short nothing has changed since not enough people give a shit. plus after the 2004 election it seemed like such a non-issue. after all the next major set of elections isnt until 2006, thats like um, a millions years away.

[fleaplus.livejournal.com]

Then why exactly has nothing been done to change the voting system?

I think part of the problem is that it can be somewhat difficult to explain to non-technical people why electronic voting machines without a paper trail suck so bad.

[aeonsbeyond.livejournal.com]

No YOU havent heard anything about it there little Mr Nug. Do you know how hard it is to get the Fed to change its operational parameters under the current admin? The voting system is in transition, they want to create voter verifiable ballots but the Fed and Diebold and other companies are resisting.

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

(And if you hadnt noticed, Liberals are the majority in OUR home state,and if it wasnt for them and the educational system in MA this whole place would be like ...lets say... Minnesota.)

[aeonsbeyond.livejournal.com]

In any case voting reform isnt exactly radical unless youre a party liner or a paid Diebold shill.

Meanwhile everyone in the Republican party with 2 or 3 brain cells have given up on Commander CukooBannanas, when will it be your turn?

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Scarborough-Country-Gop-fails.mov

[aeonsbeyond.livejournal.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/us/12vote.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


May 12, 2006
New Fears of Security Risks in Electronic Voting Systems
By MONICA DAVEY

CHICAGO, May 11 — With primary election dates fast approaching in many states, officials in Pennsylvania and California issued urgent directives in recent days about a potential security risk in their Diebold Election Systems touch-screen voting machines, while other states with similar equipment hurried to assess the seriousness of the problem.

"It's the most severe security flaw ever discovered in a voting system," said Michael I. Shamos, a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University who is an examiner of electronic voting systems for Pennsylvania, where the primary is to take place on Tuesday.

Officials from Diebold and from elections' offices in numerous states minimized the significance of the risk and emphasized that there were no signs that any touch-screen machines had been tampered with. But computer scientists said the problem might allow someone to tamper with a machine's software, some saying they preferred not to discuss the flaw at all for fear of offering a roadmap to a hacker.

"This is the barn door being wide open, while people were arguing over the lock on the front door," said Douglas W. Jones, a professor of computer science at the University of Iowa, a state where the primary is June 6.

The latest concern about the touch-screen machines was only the newest chapter in an emerging political and legal fight around the country over voting machines. While some voting officials defend the ease of touch-screens (similar to A.T.M.'s), some advocacy groups argue that optical scan machines, using paper ballots, are far more secure.

In Maryland this spring, the State House of Delegates passed a bill that would have scrapped touch-screen machines, but the Senate last month took no action on the bill, effectively killing the idea.

This week, Voter Action, a nonprofit group, assisted voters in Arizona in filing for a legal injunction to try to block the state from buying touch-screen electronic voting systems. The suit is among several the group says it has pursued, in states including California, New York and New Mexico.

The new concerns about Diebold's equipment were discovered by Harri Hursti, a Finnish computer expert who was working at the request of Black Box Voting Inc., a nonprofit group that has been critical of electronic voting in the past. The group issued a report on the findings on Thursday.

Computer scientists who have studied the vulnerability say the flaw might allow someone with brief access to a voting machine and with knowledge of computer code to tamper with the machine's software, and even, potentially, to spread malicious code to other parts of the voting system.

As word of Mr. Hursti's findings spread, Diebold issued a warning to recipients of thousands of its machines, saying that it had found a "theoretical security vulnerability" that "could potentially allow unauthorized software to be loaded onto the system."

David Bear, a spokesman for Diebold Election Systems, said the potential risk existed because the company's technicians had intentionally built the machines in such a way that election officials would be able to update their systems in years ahead.

Aviel Rubin, a professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins University, did the first in-depth analysis of the security flaws in the source code for Diebold touch-screen machines in 2003. After studying the latest problem, he said: "I almost had a heart attack. The implications of this are pretty astounding."

Gretchen Ruethling contributed reporting from Chicago for this article, and John Schwartz from New York.

[shadowfox24.livejournal.com]

The NY Times?? That's supposed to help your case? Pinch Schultzberg's rag is approaching the crediblity of the World Weekly News.

[zombiesmustdie.livejournal.com]

yes why should we believe the nytimes. afterall, computers never EVER fuck up. in any case, im sure youll get nice and pissed when the voting machines fuck up in the other guys favor. then itll be important, right?

[bluetooth16.livejournal.com]

They may not care, but at least they should look to see if its good political strategy.

[ccnuggie.livejournal.com]

I'd vote for him.

But then again, I don't have BDS.

[shadowfox24.livejournal.com]

Or P.E.S.T. (http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/shanklin_archives/pest2.asx)

[nallyo.livejournal.com]

Most of the pundits are saying that another Bush or Clinton will not be elected to office for a good long while. I think the majority of the American people agree with that.

[madmethod.livejournal.com]

I think that no matter who our next President is, half of Americans polled (give or take 10%) will say they disapprove. But since many Americans don't vote, who really gives a shit what they do or do not approve of. To add to that, many of the people who do vote get their information from a favorite pundit (O'Reily, Franken, Limbaugh, etc), or have made their decision based on a buzz word or catch phrase that's been pounded into them for months leading to the election.

People on forums like this tend to be a little more informed than the general public, or at least more interested in informing themselves. Sadly, most American voters have their heads crammed comfortably up their asses, where it's safe and familiar and warm. Until more people care enough to educate themselves, we'll always have some asshole in office that half of us hate.