Forum Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
Forum Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Forum Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Forum Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
...
|
| 7-28-05: In his own words: Jim March ... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin
Post Number: 1012
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 142 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 9:56 pm: | 
|
"Arright. There’s been a LOT of discussion of this and it’s time I spoke up for myself...The CORE reason for doing this is to establish our civil right to observe elections.
Right now a lot of county election officials in California and across America don’t believe in that right; they are dead set on taking it away from us piece by piece as elections become electronic and increasingly “automated” – and you can take that last term as meaning “in the control of the vendors”...
San Diego's election officials picked this fight, not me. You don’t trample my civil rights without consequences.
The real trick will be to try and make those consequences happen before November, establishing the principle of open access to this stuff statewide.
The real story behind this:
First point: NO FUNDRAISING IS INVOLVED HERE. I don’t need a “legal defense fund”. I’m not asking for money. Jim Hamilton helped out BIGTIME by loaning me $10k to make bail with (no bail bondsman, that’s the total amount) and then I’m paying him back tomorrow out of the $76k of Diebold money. After that you can bet I’ll make all court appearances and fight this tooth and nail.
Second point: felony charges are an interesting twist. Unexpected but not something I’m sweating. The extreme short form here is that they violated my basic civil right to observe the election (California Election Code 2300(a)(9)(A)) and in response I stopped “begging” to be allowed to observe the election and did so directly, by going through a “security door” to get closer. At which point I was (expectedly) grabbed, stuffed and cuffed.
We’ll get into details there later. For now I’ll be clear that I was unarmed (not even my usual pocketknife) and there was no violence planned or happened.
Third: this has been portrayed by some as a “publicity stunt”. Its damned well is NOT. Granted, media were present so yeah, once it became clear that MLKJr-style civil disobedience was going to be necessary, I made two reporters aware of what was going to happen. But the CORE reason for doing this is to establish our civil right to observe elections. Right now a lot of county election officials in California and across America don’t believe in that right; they are dead set on taking it away from us piece by piece as elections become electronic and increasingly “automated” – and you can take that last term as meaning “in the control of the vendors”.
I would have done the same thing with no reports present and this action can and will be a success even with no media coverage whatsoever (which isn’t what’s happening and PR *is* a nice side benefit).
OK, let’s go over the details.
First, last year I observed elections in San Joaquin County (’04 primaries) in which the right to observe the election was completely violated. There is a whole chapter on what happened there in this report to the California SecState’s office:
http://www.equalccw.com/sscomments6.pdf
As of two weeks ago, this is what I expected to see happen in San Diego. In preparation for a visit and possible protest against that sort of crime, I had the following two documents hand-delivered to the San Diego registrar’s office:
http://www.equalccw.com/openlettertosandiegoregistrar.pdf
http://www.equalccw.com/sscomments8.pdf
Then last week, the registrar (Haas) and his assistant (McNamara) tried to make it clear to local activists like Jim and Sher Hamilton that the process in San Diego would be much more open – that the monitors showing the central tabulator and it’s backup (both Diebold GEMS) would be visible “behind glass” to the viewing public doing observation.
Thus, I was pretty well convinced coming down from Sacramento that no “arrest protest” was going to be necessary. In fact, Tuesday AM I paid for my Amtrak tickets ROUND TRIP, return date Wednesday the 27th…not something I’d do if I planned to go down there to get jailed. (God, I hope I can get the date on those reset, otherwise I’m out $60, sigh.)
On the day of the election at 3:00pm, Jim Hamilton and I met with McNamara to discuss logistics of the night’s activities starting around 7:00pm and running pretty late into the night. First stop was to the “public viewing areas” and the “GEMS behind glass” observation post.
Houston, we have a problem.
The monitor was 8ft behind the glass.
Now we didn’t absolutely know for sure we had a problem – the screens weren’t showing active working displays and to the county’s credit they were 19” monitors. Much would depend first on the resolution they were set to (800x600 makes for a perfectly usable GEMS screen and probably could be read at that distance) and where the console operator’s head was gonna be (and for that matter how tall the guy was, how often he’d be there, where he stuck his head, etc.)
Jim Hamilton, McNamara and I then went to a cubicle.
We discussed the demand to have the GEMS screen viewable, and I explained that I didn’t care how it was made viewable – moving the screen closer to the window would do and at least establish the principle that they were trying. Using a projector to send the signal through the window to the wall behind would be better if they had a projector lying around; I also offered to make a run to Fry’s Electronics a couple miles away and purchase a video signal splitter to allow use of a second monitor up closer to the window.
All of these proposals to improve compliance with Election Code 2300(a)(9)(A) were flatly rejected. McNamara tried to characterize these requests as “coming on the day of the election” when in truth his boss Haas had had them for almost two weeks.
I then made a second request: an official (if hand-written at the scene) California Public Records Act Request for “snapshots” of the GEMS database taken shortly after poll close and another near midnight.
It’s not often I say good things about Diebold products. One of the few features I like is the ability to do “instant backups” of the database to the included CD-ROM burner without interfering with the election processing in any other way. It’s standard procedure for counties to do this throughout election night just for backup purposes in case something dies. Cutting extra backups (each of which fits easily on a CD-ROM would cost a few keystrokes time and about 20 cents a disk (and we brought a few blanks).
More “snapshots” would have been nicer but the two requested would at least have been a good start. And we don’t consider these just “public records” – access to those files in a timely fashion (too quick to allow hand tampering) would allow monitoring of the election on my own laptop. This request is therefore an integrated component of the right to observe elections.
By 7:00pm, that request too had been flatly refused.
Make NO mistake folks, if any ONE of these requests had been honored in the slightest, I would have accepted that as precedent and dealt with the rest later.
As it was, with even a shifting of the table being refused as “inconvenient”, the stage was set for a confrontation not of my making, but theirs.
Once the election started up, it was clear that our concerns re: table location were valid and then some. The screen resolution was set to a miniscule 1280x1024 pixels, for ridiculously small text unreadable by any normal human at 8 feet.
Much else happened by the time it became clear that “refusing to go to the back of the bus” was going to be necessary. A set of unidentified “mystery terminals” were systematically plugged in one at a time to the GEMS box – optical scan units that were in unusual luggage were used to upload memory cards separate from the four units otherwise dedicated to that – combined with a lot of frantic typing and manipulation of GEMS. These “mystery terminals” were used one at a time as if to test them, and we have no idea what that was about.
We learned one REALLY interesting thing:
The GEMS box was connected to the Internet.
Oh, not directly! They had a set of “one way firewalls” allowing data to come out of GEMS onto the county LAN where it was served up on web pages. But get this. They didn’t set up these firewalls themselves. Rather, they paid SAIC to do it for them. For those not following along in extreme detail, SAIC is a software development and computer consulting house that does almost exclusively government contracts; their ties to military contracting are very well known…I’ll let others discuss that connection.
But in any case, San Diego has in my opinion turned it’s entire election security over to TWO different “black box vendors” – Diebold and SAIC. A security failure (accidental or deliberate) by either could leave their election integrity under threat.
------------------------
Now let’s talk legalities.
California Elections Code 15204 requires county election officials to make “all proceedings” “open to the view of the public”.
---
15204. All proceedings at the central counting place, or counting
places, if applicable, shall be open to the view of the public but no
person, except one employed and designated for the purpose by the
elections official or his or her authorized deputy, shall touch any
ballot container.
---
Nowhere are the terms “view” or “observe” defined in this or any other law connected to the subject. But do note that this law is originally much older than electronic voting in general. It was later updated with:
---
Access to the area where electronic data processing equipment is being operated may be restricted to those persons authorized by the elections official.
---
San Diego and other counties appear to believe that the latter section SUPERCEDES and eliminates the former. Not hardly! It just means that if they go all-electronic, they have to use electronics to maintain viewing accessability! And this won’t cost much – a video signal splitter/booster is about $200, plus the use of an extra monitor for the night. Video projectors are another possibility; they’re expensive but the county probably has them laying around anyways and can press them into service for the night.
Now, this sort of thing where a government body is required to do something and doesn’t is common. You can take them to court of course, and depending on the IQ of the judge you may or may not get anywhere. Since it isn’t civil rights in question, a lawyer who tries to help out on the cheap will have to fight to get his fees back at a minimum and it’s not guaranteed. It’s a long, bitter mess.
BUT EC15204 has a companion piece: California Election Code 2300(a)(9)(A) gives us a basic civil right to observe elections:
---
2300(9)(A) You have the right to ask questions about election procedures and observe the elections process.
---
Now we’re no longer talking about “ho hum government requirements that often get ignored”. Now we’re talking about civil rights. And we’re in a whole ‘nuther realm of law. Violations of civil rights are punishable against bad government actors. Penalties can apply; in many cases lawyers can get triple attorney fees back on a win.
More: when this cross-connects with criminal law, one of the times when arresting you becomes a real problem is when it happens IN CONJUNCTION with a violation of your civil rights. Not only that: when you’re fighting a criminal charge, one of the arguments that a court cannot block is that you did a particular action in support of your civil rights.
And this, folks, is why their “felony charges” don’t scare me! The felony thing was decided upon by Haas and McNamara by the way, the cops initially thought this would be a “no big deal” infraction or misdemeanor bust until McNamara told ‘em to “go long”. I don’t know if they factored this in or not but the WORST thing they’re threatening me with is the lifetime loss of my firearms ownership rights…I’m a “gun nut”, remember?
Their probable plan is to try and plea me down to some nuisance charge to avoid the felony, but once I do that I can’t argue in any court (criminal or civil!) that they violated my civil rights. I go home with my tail between my legs, they get to keep running secret elections.
I don't scare easily.
They’ve charged me with Elections Code 18502:
---
18502. Any person who in any manner interferes with the officers holding an election or conducting a canvass, or with the voters lawfully exercising their rights of voting at an election, as to prevent the election or canvass from being fairly held and lawfully conducted, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years.
---
Let’s get real: anybody here think that charge will stick? Remember that the GEMS server screen was 8 feet in past the doors or a hair over (the door was offset 3ft from the observation window), I made no attempt to touch any piece of gear whatsoever, I stopped on my own 4ft in, and I ended up “pausing the action in there” *maybe* a total of 2 or 3 seconds.
“Oh, but he distracted the officials!” Oooohhh, bad gun nut!”
Except that in other circumstances, I’m specifically ALLOWED to and did for up to five or ten minutes at a time asking questions pursuant to:
---
Elections Code 2300(B) You have the right to ask questions of the precinct board and
election officials regarding election procedures and to receive an
answer or be directed to the appropriate official for an answer.
However, if persistent questioning disrupts the execution of their
duties, the board or election officials may discontinue responding to
questions.
---
So…distract ‘em for 3 seconds tops in one room, it’s a felony…minutes at a time on the other side of the door, it’s a civil right?
Ah. Yeah. Let’s see what a SAN DIEGO jury makes of this, when they’re dealing with a guy who wants to monitor elections as per his civil right in a city where the last mayor was in office ONE DAY before being convicted of crimes, where the 2004 primaries were a total disaster, where the pension fund is basically a toxic superfund sight, where two city councilmen have been convicted and a third wasn’t only because he died first…need I go on?
No. I don't think so. There will be consequences.
The real trick will be to try and make those consequences happen before November, establishing the principle of open access to this stuff statewide. And that’s one area where criminal law helps: by not “waiving time” I can make “step one” (the criminal jury trial) happen in 45 days or less. An aquittal there will sting ‘em pretty good and at least help; after that comes the civil court fight and I’ll save a discussion of that for later.
Jim March
* * * * *
From admin: Permission to reprint granted, with link. Feel free to send to blogs, lists, and media. Send public officials a message: we will no longer go to the back of the bus! |
admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin
Post Number: 1013
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 - 10:40 pm: |
|
THE TRAP OF POLITE POLITICS -- from Bev
I think this is an appropriate place to reprint a synopsis of an excellent
article, sent to me by Carolyn Kaye of http://www.makethemaccountable.com. The original article is specific to a political situation, and because we are a nonpartisan organization I have edited it into a synopsis without the partisanship. I have included the link to the original article. -- Bev
The original and complete article, by Jeffrey Feldman can be found here:
Frameshop
(Synopsis, translated into election integrity language [sections in italics are
mine])
Breaking Frame
Some of us are trapped in the frame of "polite politics."
Voting integrity advocates all over the place are voicing the same argument: "let's be polite."
Think about this: Why do we believe it is impolite to question public officials?
We believe that it is impolite because vendors and propaganda factions have promoted the idea that questioning what they do is inappropriate. That is the frame: "impolite activists."
Or worse. Note that in public records, Black Box Voting has found election officials referring to election integrity advocates as "berserkers" -- and recently, even as "terrorists" -- clearly inappropriate framing, considering that public officials work for the citizens.
It is amazing how quickly this kind of thinking has taken control of even the best minds out there.
This kind of thinking sometimes even infects some activists who are on our own side. "Harming the movement" it's called, when one activist does things differently than another. But we are not ants. We need not march in lockstep. In fact, the "swarm" approach -- attacking the problem from many unorchestrated angles -- has proven to be one of the most effective ways for individuals to fight large, well-funded corporate-friendly powers. (See the writings of Naomi Klein for more on this).
Time and time again we have faced this particular framing problem and been unable to understand what is happening. And it is happening again.
The goal of the "activists are impolite" frame is to shut down all criticism of POLICIES by focusing attention on PROCESS. That is the goal. "We are bad Americans if we don't go along with the process."
We must break frame to win this issue. The idea that we should be polite while being pushed out of the election process, and then really kick up the heat for the next one, is totally flawed.
It's worse than that: It helps perpetuate the problem by reinforcing the "polite politics" frame, while running out the clock on deadlines, like HAVA and upcoming elections.
This is not about yelling or being angry. Public officials have shown time and time again that they believe the purpose of taxpayers is to obey their will. And they have promoted individuals who have proven their loyalty by obeying even the most questionable requests.
America deserves public officials who obey the Constitution, not election officials who obey the vendor.
We must break the "polite politics" frame and break it now.
* * * * * |
jimmarch
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: jimmarch
Post Number: 3
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 6:38 am: |
|
A reporter asked me last night, "do you do this all the time, get arrested like this?" and my reply was an emphatic "NO!". In fact, so far as I'm aware this is the first case of a "civil disobedience move from the MLKJr/Ghandi playbook" in electronic voting reform history.
(Except that in one key sense it is NOT civil disobedience and I'll touch on that in a sec.)
The closest anybody came before that was Bev playing "tug of garbage bag" with some idiot of an official in Volusia County who also yelled out "call the sheriff" - no arrest though because Bev wasn't doing anything the sheriff considered illegal, there's no such charge as "stealing garbage".
------------
In my case...well WAS I breaking the law?
Consider this analogy. You have a small-town courthouse with one judge, who's a crabby SOB and decides he doesn't want to hear any more cases involving police brutality. They're annoying, they usually lose due to lack of enough proof for this judge anyways, so he bars any such plaintiffs with a no-trespassing order.
Some guy walks in with such a complaint, a bailiff sees this at the door, advises the guy that the complaint is barred from the building and so is he. Plaintiff gets mad and tries to go in anyways, bailiff arrests him for trespassing.
Ultimately, probably in appeals of course, that charge wouldn't stick. Why not? Because the guy's 1st Amendment right to petition for redress of grievance CIVIL RIGHT was being violated. That makes all the government actions up through the arrest, prosecution and trial illegal.
This is the same thing. The civil right in question is more obscure, in fact most people don't even know about it - but our right to observe elections under EC2300 is no less real.
----------------
And now, a jailtime story  .
When you get in there, batches of people (drunk and sober mixed) are processed through various stages, each in their own large mixed cell. One stage with a small cell (batches of five guys) is the "get undressed and change into our stuff" stage, involving undies, socks, pants, shirt and slippers. Next cell is much bigger collecting a bunch of these batches of five.
People are kinda depressed, talking, and one guy says "hey man, my underwear is too tight". Another on the opposite side says "well mine is too loose".
I was near the middle and said in a perfectly ordinary voice "so switch".
The whole room busted a gut laughing .
------------
For the record: there wasn't a hint of a threat of violence in there, from anybody (guard or inmate). The other inmates knew basically what I was in for and were amazed somebody *wanted* to be in . The newspaper (SD Union/Trib) on Wednesday had that brief blurb about me in there and that was passed around the barracks.
My only complaint is that there's a SERIOUS basic sanitation problem in there. It took a total of 10 hours to get through all the "processing stages" to where you actually had a bed (2" mattress) and bedding. Until that you're in that series of holding cells, with nothing but thin steel benches and concrete floors. People often slept on the floor, some with visible wounds and the like. And the first guy to get the "pillow" was lucky, although people would then "unroll" part of the "pillow" and use it for it's intended purpose. Yup. We're talking about the toilet paper roll...
Several inmates said that staph infections were rampant in there. It's rather obvious why.
I don't know what the solution is but...10 hours until you get a bed (mostly waiting!) when you started things late at night (the most common situation) is just disgusting.
Libertarian comment 'o thee day: most of 'em were in on minor drug stuff. Legalize drugs and the processing would go a LOT faster'n'cheaper.
Jim |
lora
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: lora
Post Number: 37
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 7:37 am: |
|
Let me add my support. I believe in politeness, but that doesn't mean I believe in getting scrod. I also believe in free and fair elections, honest and accurate counting of votes, and the right to observe and verify the process. Ya done good, Jim. My thanks. |
ubetchaiam
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: ubetchaiam
Post Number: 94
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 8:46 am: |
|
My 2 cents. Thanks,Bev, for the article. The 'game' seems to be that people in public office OR major Party hierarchies seem to think the public is their servant, not the other way around and every damn one of them need to be told upfront that they are OUR servants, not the other way around.
Secondly, the axiom 'trust yourself and question authority' is more true now than ever before.
Third, Abu Gharib,Guantanamo, etc. ALL have their 'roots' in how people are treated domestically in jails. How many forum participants are aware that a Judge ordered the ENTIRE Calif. prison system into 'receivership' because of health issues?
I've experienced what Jim has simply because of a clerical mistake on the part of clerk in a sheriff's office. And what woke me up was the public defender urging me to 'cop a plea' to something I hadn't done.
Lastly, this shows beyond a doubt the 'power' the http://www.calelections.org/ people think they have.
It is why I keep urging Californians to send in a complaint to the Sec'y of State's office:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_fraud.htm
AND write the Chairpersons of the CA Senate and House Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments
http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/STANDING/EL/_home1/PROFILE.HTM
http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=7 http://www.guidetogov.org/ca/state/overview/legislative.html
Also,FWIW, John of 'Raw Story' has put Jim's story on the 'front page':http://www.rawstory.com/
under 'blogs/media'; it also was posted on http://whatreallyhappened.com/ yesterday. And other places. I've also asked DemocracyNow (Amy Goodman) to do a story on this. |
admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin
Post Number: 1017
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 9:26 am: |
|
ubetchu-R-a force to be reckoned with. |
jimmarch
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: jimmarch
Post Number: 6
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 11:21 pm: |
|
I've finally gotten around to reading the massive posts on DU about this, and I'm going to briefly lay out two important points:
1) This was UNPLANNED. Arright? Local San Diego activists were told by the ROV's office that the public would be allowed to see the central tabulator screen over a week before the election. They relayed that to me. I therefore basically said to myself "well scratch that idea...I'll go down and watch, but buy round-trip train tickets to save $14..."
Then when we saw what the room layout was at around 3:15pm the day of the election, it was like "oh, waitasec, this may be "game on" after all". But we STILL didn't know for sure until we saw the screen resolution at 1280x1024 at around 7:15pm when they briefly fired up the GEMS box.
So the various comments about "why didn't he bring lawyers" (or other complaints about planning issues) are a bad joke.
And yes, Bev really did write the first article posted on this stuff late Tuesday after learning I was arrested. At least one person has said it looked "prepared ahead of time" - that's simply an accidental compliment of Bev's writing skills under deadline, a compliment I heartily share.
2) The ONLY type of court action that can be finished and done with before the November elections would be a criminal trial! By refusing to "waive time" I can make it happen in 45 days. Any other action, whether it's a lawsuit for public records, a lawsuit under EC2300, whatever, we'd be damned lucky to get anywhere before June '06, never mind November.
As it is, if I completely walk on this it'll REALLY set the registrars on notice that we DO NOT have to be "polite" watching the November elections. And that's a GOOD thing. Then if I can at least survive preliminary dismissal motions on a civil suit for violations of civil rights, false arrest, false charges, etc. before November, which is possible, then they'd REALLY have a threat hanging over their heads.
----------
Finally, and it's certainly not "important", various DUers don't seem to like me very much. They really love calling me a "gun nut" in disdainful terms. Yawn. The fact is, the current head of the Democratic National Committee has an NRA "A" rating and is as strong on the gun issue as I am. It's also noteworthy that what I'm best known for in the "gun rights world" is gathering and publishing hard facts on the racist and corrupt trends in gun control in California; if that makes me a "right winger" of some sort in some people's eyes, so be it. For the record though:
http://www.equalccw.com/CCWDATA2003.html
http://www.equalccw.com/fresnobee.html
http://www.equalccw.com/practicalrace.html
http://www.equalccw.com/oaklandzen.html - this last is simply dead funny... |
jimmarch
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: jimmarch
Post Number: 8
Registered: 01-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 11:46 pm: |
|
Sorry, one more thing: somebody on DU said I was charged with resisting arrest. NOT true at all - the sole charge is Elections Code 18502 as discussed. The cops were quite professional about not making it look like I was resisting, not tacking on more charges, etc.
(I'm aware of a bunch of cases where cops deliberately made people look like they were resisting by applying a "pain grip" to key points on the victim's arm or whatever. Make somebody wiggle around in pain while a couple of cops "hold him down" and even if there's cameras right there they won't catch this trick. This is the main reason I said in a calm voice "I'm not resisting" when they grabbed me. Again: the deputies applied NO dirty tricks whatsoever, in fact the main thing they grabbed to drag me back out was my belt, a perfectly humane and professional touch. Later, when it was clear an old shoulder injury (rotator cuff about 15 years ago) was bothering me, they "double cuffed" to allow a bit more slack on it.) |
admin
Board Administrator
Username: admin
Post Number: 1029
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 11:59 pm: |
|
Yay, let me pause for a 'sec to be thrilled about the compliment (on a 10-minute writing job sounding like a 'prepared story.' It's not often that I get compliments, even accidental ones, from DU). Yup, I wrote that article lickety-split. Jennifer Hamilton called me to tell me that her father called her to say you'd been arrested, Jim.
Well, I'll be doggoned if you're gonna sleep on a concrete floor with a roll of toilet paper for a pillow, without at least getting honored by this Web site. So I jumped in my car and drove to the office (5 minutes away). Called Jim Hamilton on my cell phone -- knew from Jennifer he was an eyewitness.
Typed every word he said as fast as it came out of his mouth. Then edited it into an article and posted it.
You are one of the role models for this movement, Jim -- yes, and you're a colorful character, but those of us who know you know your honor and your genuine compassion, as well as your flamboyance. You inspire people.
I wanted to share your "We can DO something about this" attitude with everyone. Within an hour, I had the article sent to 16,000 activists.
Plopped the story into a 1-sheet press release, and it winged its way to 1,500 media outlets in California. I also sent it to the Daily Show, Jay Leno, Conan O'Brien and the Letterman Show, plus Good Morning America and the morning shows, just for good measure.
And to those elitists who "accuse" us of getting publicity, well shoot, yes! We need about one thousand times as much media attention to this issue as we currently have. Folks, the way media works is they like to cover -- um -- news. Got that? And what Jim did is what the media nowadays calls "news."
Of course, it's also true that the media doesn't like to cover complex and scary stories of the amorphous blob type, and that's what this story really is. So we have to give them bits to nibble on, things they can digest, as often as possible. On a hairy sum'bitch like the voting issue, you get to the tipping point by giving it kibbles 'n bits whenever you have them, and pounding a thousand tiny nails into it along the way to rile it up.
So yeah, when I heard Jim had done this courageous and uncomfortable thing, I wanted to honor him. Wanted to make sure we pounded another tiny nail, in his name. Stayed up till 3 a.m. gettng the story out to the press. And it worked, as did the fine work done by Jim Hamilton (an unsung hero in this fight, along with his wife Shar). I know it was no picnic for them. They had Jim's back and also arranged a press conference.
It surely must suck to get arrested. But I'll walk across hot coals before I see anyone from Black Box Voting get arrested in pursuit of voting rights, without at least sounding an alarm.
Jim and I have been going up against the big boys for a long time, and all of us need to remember -- no matter what disagreements we may have over strategy -- that when someone tries to take down one of us, they should expect to face all of us. I've said it before and I'll say it again: We MUST stand shoulder to shoulder when our civil rights are at stake.
The tipping point: The point at which it is no longer possible to stuff the story back into the bottle.
We're getting very close. I can smell it.
Cheers, and g'nite.
Bev |
linda_franz
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: linda_franz
Post Number: 152
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 7:43 am: |
|
You know, you just can't please some folks.
If something had been staged, they would have complained about it being staged.
If something wasn't staged, they would have complained about lost opportunity.
The point here is that a few find something to harp on no matter what.
Let's put all our efforts on succeeding.
The tangibles available to people all over this site are tools for regaining our vote. Those tangibles are products of BBV and many other individuals and organizations work, as evidenced by the many links to be found here.
We can do this.
Remember- Actions speak louder than words. |
mymarkx
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: mymarkx
Post Number: 2
Registered: 07-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, July 29, 2005 - 11:46 am: |
|
Nobody who is deeply invested in dirty politics as usual, wants to come right out and admit that they prefer election fraud to election reform.
The Democratic Party, is deeply invested in dirty politics as usual. Mention election reform, and they start calling you divisive and disloyal, if not an outright traitor. After all, why should they care if elections are fraudulent, as long as Democrats get a turn to win once in a while? Just get behind Dean 110% and pay no attention to that black box behind the curtain.
I've learned the hard way to take anything [like this] with several large grains of salt.
I'm in San Diego. I was a poll-watcher in the previous election, and Jim and Shar Hamilton coordinated the poll-watching. But when they emailed to ask me if I wanted to be a poll-watcher again this time, I declined, explaining that if any fraud was going on, which I suspected to be the case, it was happening inside the Diebold optical scanners and tabulators, which a poll-watcher could not observe.
Jim and Shar then emailed back to say they were having a meeting about possible election auditing, and did I wish to attend. I most certainly did. The meeting was at Jim and Shar's house on July 16th, ten days before the election. There were less than a dozen of us at that meeting and Jim March was not there. We decided to attempt two things: a parallel election project, and to try to observe the central tabulator. And now you know the rest of the story.
Edited out a specific reference to a particular web site. -- Admin |
|
|
