Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| (US) 6/07 - Kucinich revokes his supp... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6317
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 11:40 am: | 
|
At DemocracyFest right now. Dennis Kucinich is speaking. He has just pulled his support for HR 811, the Holt Bill. He will inform Rush Holt tomorrow that he cannot support the bill. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 3863
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 2:48 pm: |
|
Thanks for posting this so quickly. Great news. I hope Holt is paying attention. |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 40
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 3:05 pm: |
|
Thanks for posting this: a ray of sunlight through the dark perennial clouds of our fight.
The problem I've had with Kucinich, perennially also, is that he continues a two-step, a political dance, that leaves me confused in following the foot-work. Wasn't it Dennis almost a year ago that was going to back all paper, in championing HR 6200 to much fanfare at the Tri-C gathering in Cleveland? All the while backing Holt as well? And, long before that, I asked him, mano a mano, face to face, in a local schmooze, "What are we going to do about Election fraud?" And he was quite ruffled and said, "I'm backing paper trails." And, like my conversation with the local ROV, that question marked an abrupt end to the lengthy schmooze. Handlers descended, in both cases, and whisked 'em away. So now, we're supposed to believe Dennis, when the latest I hear is that he is not withdrawing his name from the co-sponsorship of Holt's bill, just his support?
Say what? Either I'm too obtuse to follow the subtleties of his steps, or I smell something fishy. Again. Perhaps I just don't speak "politicalese," but it strikes me that too many do. We'd like a clear position on Paper Only, Sans Ops. From the get go. Anything else is election protection in name only, i.e., just one more perforated condom, to use a colorful visualization. And accurate, in terms of the STD's planned for the American, and World, Electorate. ( Just ask all the French rioting contre Sarkozy, and ignored monolithically by American media, about the word "Sans Ops," which works even better in their patois than over here. )
Non-Optically Yours,
John Ervin
Native Intelligence Agency
Chief/Officer |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6320
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 3:39 pm: |
|
After meeting with many, many people here, one thing is clear: The Holt people have provided misinformation to several of the co-sponsors of the bill and to other congresspersons, and they are surprised when they actually read the bill and see the lies. For example, Holt's people seem to be telling them that in the latest version, the EAC is out of the picture, when in fact simply by reading the bill you see that the EAC is empowered in specific language 32 times and is now allocated funding that quintuples the original funding of that organization. I just spoke to one fairly prominent person today who was under the impression that the new Holt Bill allows candidates access to the voting machines and their code if there is litigation, when in fact the bill never allows that, and explicitly adds federal authorization of trade secrets in vote-counting for the first time in history.
The bill DOES allow a litigant to examine a "lab specimen" of source code only (not a working system and never a system actually used in any election); for this meaningless privlege, the election official or litigant who looks at it must sign a nondisclosure agreement for the life of the trade secret and under penalty of punitive state trade secret laws. Unlike patents, trade secrets have no expiration date -- Coca Cola is still claiming trade secrets to its formulas 125 years later. So basically, "if we show you the code, we have to kill you" (or at least, your ability to tell anyone what you saw -- it's permanent, and for giving up your freedom of speech you will be shown a LAB QUEEN only, not a machine used in any real election.
Given the level of disinformation out on this bill, it is important for all of us to straighten out the record with our congressional reps. |
John Dean
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bozosforbush
Post Number: 917
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 6:23 pm: |
|
Thank you Bev, for everything you do.
Deserter, brain is fried, no WMDs, yada yada yada. No wonder we clowns laugh.
|
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6321
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 10, 2007 - 8:12 pm: |
|
Thanks, John. I think the credit for this decision goes to the honorable Dennis Kucinich, and to Democracy for New Hampshire and Nancy Tobi. |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 41
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 - 10:42 am: |
|
Thanks Bev: I hope you're right about D. Kucinich. We just have a real problem with the political dance he's had over this issue, for years. I don't know the facts of it nearly to the depth you do, or even many another, and that's also a fact ~~ it's just that he's a "Democrat," and starts with all that faux-progressive baggage that is part and parcel ( or, baggage ) of all that implies. I know he can't move mountains alone, but I'm concerned by his waffling on this issue. Waffling seems to be in the job description, but there are some who don't ~~ so why not Dennis, on this issue ?? Is it just "perceived" waffling, or am I right, is it constant ? If I am, I don't trust him. It would seem that this is perhaps the one issue where waffing is disastrous, but then as we know, it's also so fraught with perils that we don't envy anyone in Congress who wants to take a clear stand on this.
But, we need heroes. I just don't know if we're ever going to find them, or more than a handful, in Congress...............
I know you can believe me when I say I hope I'm wrong. But my hopes are mostly tied up in finding means to "insure" that they represent our interests. Those are, currently, still more on the horizon than close at hand.
~~John E |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6323
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2007 - 12:33 pm: |
|
Actually, we should NOT be building heroes and villains. We should be focusing on the task at hand.
Kucinich pulled his name from the bill. The emphasis on people being "trusted" or "untrustworthy" or "good" or "bad" sends us all off in the wrong direction.
Let's stick to the issues. Was pulling his name off the Holt Bill a good thing to do or not? I contend it was a good thing to do. |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 44
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 5:04 pm: |
|
Well, I take your point, and it could have more merit than I know, I'm unclear on how to gauge that right now, so I hope you understand this.
I didn't express these concerns ( not necessarily doubts, just a troubling preponderance of certain evidence ) repeatedly, without cause.... I thought Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, my former Congresswoman, was a staunch ally, after all the work she did at Columbus, and now she's been in cahoots with Hillary on that terrible "bill." I tuned out after that, don't know if she's still foisting that upon us, but I was truly shocked, not easy to do to us these days.
My comment about "heroes" wasn't idle or idolatrous: YOU are just such a hero, for the right reasons. And there are villains, too. If I catch your drift, it's that you've been hard at work for years exposing villains, but that anyone who is sincerely involved in this debate, but just doesn't "get it," should not be alienated?
Whether or not it's effective to call both to account, or to separate "the sheep from the goats" is very debatable, as an "issue." We can ignore that issue, and call it not *the* issue, until we regret being hit by friendly fire. Been there, done that, and that makes it an issue.
However, perhaps you're right, maybe the only way to advance is to ignore those issues altogether and just continue to get the message out. And, if there are villains, we must simply work around them, anyway.
It is significant that he took his name off the bill, and that may even be a turning point.
However, the argument is not correctly stated as "sticking to issues" since the patterns of voting and changing, and changing again, are things that should be tracked, and carefully. And I tend more and more to think those results should be more transparent.
And, besides, if our reps can't stand the "heat of the kitchen" etc. Perhaps I'm seeing this from the other side, but I think perhaps the biggest problem we've had so far is that our reps are too seldom called upon for clear explanations, and accounts. It could be argued that's why we're in this mess. Michael Moore gets a cam and mic right in their faces, and it has had great effect. It might have been decisive in the last go-round, but for vote fraud. I find it intriguing he hasn't jumped in on this issue, yet. Hadn't he said he was going to chronicle everything in Florida, in 2004. I wonder where that footage ended up ? Such issues puzzle me, and will continue.
It may be counter-intuitive for many people working so hard on this, to say anything to question the source and direction of anyone who is a potential ally, at a federal level especially, but I think that IS the issue. In fact, within one of our groups I did that to several people just this week, even abrasively, to find out just what's going on, and boy did I. And I found that many aren't even on board with us, at all. I was shocked, but not surprised. That seemed like vital information to have, so perhaps I'm at a different point than some others, and can sure use some of that info, at least for my own bearings and direction.
Simply said. I'm not sniping. I just want to know "whither," and really know it.
If you are so much deeper into this than I, at the ground level, then you no doubt know things I don't, but that's a different position.
Having been several months on the back burner, I perhaps speak for the rank and file, as some of us come up to speed, when I say I want to paraphrase "Jerry Maguire" and just say "Show me the PAPER." And why not? I mean, to our reps.
I fervently hope D. Kucinich will. I'm sure "we" all do......
Meanwhile, I've just got new services two weeks ago that greatly expand our phoning and emailing capabilities, and I'm going to be working them till the wires are smokin', in D.C. and Sacramento, etc.
Peace and Paper, Only: John E
PS By the way, I just caught, a few minutes ago, Abbey's and Vickie's Video's at Youtube: FABULOUS. I'm writing them in as candidates for Prez/Vice Prez on the Paper Only Party. ( Except, the stock I'm using, my paper ballot, is so thick that the former K. Blackwell might even call it "cardboard." ) |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 45
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Actually, after pondering it at some length, I saw your insight. With the dense political landscape, and all the fallout, the only really positive and practical thing to do is to continue to pound on the doors with our messages, and not get involved in the virtues or vices of our reps. After all, there's not much we can do about that.
But we can work on the message. Nobody wants to be a hero on this, anyway, who would want to stick a head above the fox hole. But if we continue to build support, we can advance. That said, we do need to keep close tabs on positions, though.
Thanks, your pithy comment got me to consider: the sort of paralysis that can set in when we are repeatedly disappointed, how that's a prison or false trap of our own making, that the cause itself can free us, in the pursuit of it.
Although it wasn't exactly what I had in mind, you clearly state that the Blame Game as such doesn't help us advance, clearly. So, you're right, it's really not a question of direction, it's just not a fruitful pursuit, if we want to choose the best, and most effective. I getcha.
Peace and Paper Only, Always: John E |
Rosemary Hite
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: R_r_h
Post Number: 1
Registered: 06-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 9:18 pm: |
|
I suspect that Kucinich had not had a chance to catch up on the latest changes when he answered your question. I'm certain he will do so because he typically does a pretty thorough job of researching and understanding the issues he is voting on.
It's important for us that he removed his support publicly. (as Bev said)
Now I need to see if I can get anywhere with Peter DeFazio who is still one of the co-signers. And I kind of know him. |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 46
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 11:35 pm: |
|
I know that currently, given all the other serious tests of their character and pluck, that our reps have a lot on the table. Perhaps never in human history has a government been complicit in so many crimes, with the war, DU, home-grown terror, and home-grown torture, just for starters.
So, trust me, there are many of us who have compassion for these guys. Still, though, we're scratching our heads at just what exactly is the major malfunction in these disasters, that would lead to Michael Moore documenting in his 2004 film how many of our reps hadn't read ANY of the Patriot Act, before signing off on that Auction. That is in direct contrast to its authors, its chief who was born in Vietnam, went to Harvard, and as a sort of ghoulish mutation of the best of Thomas Jefferson, penned the thing at a very early age, many moons before Bush was "elected." And yet, and yet: most of our Congress hadn't even read the thing.
Well, the poor people are stressed, clearly. What, with all the fundraisers and lobbyists banging on their doors, they couldn't even read a document that signed over our Bill of Rights. To be blunt.
Now, this 811 Bill ( Fahrenheit 811 ?? ) is just crawling with direct assaults on whatever voting rights we still may or may not have, and yet some of its chief sponsors don't even realize that. I don't know, that's a hard sell. I agree, Kucinich taking his name off ( by the way, I looked it up online and his name is still there ) is perhaps a very good thing, but I saw Kennedy's and many others.
Yikes. Maybe we need to do what Mike Moore did, and circle the Rotunda with a Good Humor Ice Cream truck and read the bill out over the tinny P.A. system. Maybe if we could catch them all in the cafeteria, and blare the thing out over the Muzak.
I dunno, I'm speechless with rage. The one good thing about it: I can be enraged, now, and still be cool. That's a neat trick, and years of watching the American Devolution has developed that fine gift.
Peace: John Ervin
Native Intelligence Agency
Chief/Officer
"So ~~other than that~~ did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln??" |
Nancy Tobi
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ntobi
Post Number: 110
Registered: 01-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, June 15, 2007 - 7:08 am: |
|
Rosemary and anyone else, if you can arrange a conference call with your Dem rep or their legislative director (and we are focused on the Dems who are leading this ill fated charge), we will arrange for two experts to be on this call to explain the problems with the bill. For more information, contact me directly at 603-315-4500 or ntobi@democracyfornewhampshire.com.
As constituents, you should be able to make this request and have it honored. |
John C. Ervin
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Muservin
Post Number: 49
Registered: 06-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Sunday, June 17, 2007 - 3:03 pm: |
|
While sticking to the message, and not building, or profiling, either Heroes or Villains, I'm still concerned that what was reported at the top of this thread, and now as the latest news item on BBV's home page, has not yet worked it's way to the top of other pages, such as Kucinich's official website: namely, Kucinich pulling his support from Holt's HR 811. I suppose there is some lag time, always, and I'm holding off from further fulmination, but it bothers me that on his page of "issues" and the link to "voting," he has a number of posts, but nothing about this. Also, in his "latest news" with an entry for June 13, coming after last Sunday, he had a couple of items about Impeachment resolutions against Cheney, but nothing about this.
That bothers us, I'm sure I can say all of us. And it bothers us pretty much as much that such equally distinguished reps as John Lewis of Georgia, Barbara Lee, and others, who have taken extremely strong and valiant stands, solo, in the past, continue to have their names on this bill.
Normally, I'd start pinching myself, and begin to wonder if I hadn't missed something, but that is what ups the "eerie" factor all the more for us: that we can clearly see how deadly dangerous a bill is HR 811, yet such staunch freedom fighters can not. I mean, it really isn't rocket science: why even RISK a thing like democracy with machines that can't be relied upon for any good thing?
Beats me. Any guesses? I've heard the most commonly voiced one: that they haven't come up to speed yet on this issue. Well, how much more of our Republic needs to vanish out the back door in this electronic heist, before they do?
That's just my only real question here? How many ways does it need to be spelled out? It really bothers us that they don't get this.
Peace: John Ervin
Native Intelligence Agency
Chief/Officer |
|
|
