Who started the Bev/Olberman war?

[Must_B_Free]

can someone answer that?

[smartvoter]

1. I think it started with Olbermann's blog.

People seemed to line up on one side or the other right away, but Olbermann said he's been hammered with e-mails asking him to put her on TV, so maybe we pushed it to the forefront...???

[Must_B_Free]

3. Exactly

All I am saying is be aware.

Remember how the TANG memos were "great for us"? So it seemed, then they were used to tarnish us.

Olberman is great for us? Yes, but we have to keep a suspicious eye on gift horses.

Why do you suppose GE is letting Olberman tread on ground that could cost the election and potentially billions in contracts for GE? Does GE want the war to end?

[ogradda]

2. i don't know

and i don't really understand it anyway. i haven't been home all day guess i'm outta the loop.

[YellowDoginthehouse]

4. maddy something.

people just went nutz!

[ogradda]

5. just saw the thread

well. all that excitement over some bad manners. either that or i just don't get it.

[Maddy McCall]

6. No, I posted some of Bev's posts...

but they couldn't deal with the real Bev, so they lost their minds and attacked me.

They weren't capable of objective discussion, just attacks on me.

:shrug:

[YellowDoginthehouse]

7. Maddy, what is your deal?

What are you doing? If you have a personal issue with this woman, take it up privately!

What is your point in smearing her here? What are you trying to accomplish, exactly?

[Maddy McCall]

16. This isn't about me, sweetie.

It's about the person who has assumed the position as standard-bearer of the BBV movement, who has been thoroughly discredited by Olbermann today.

She claims she has the video, yet she won't allow him to air it. Either:

1) she has no video, and has been lying all along; or

2) She has the video, and could give it to Olbermann, who would air it and create a groundswell against BBV, thus possibly changing the course of this election, but she won't let OLBERMANN air it because she wants to put it in her so-called docudrama, from which she and only she will benefit financially and professionally.

It HAS to be one of the two. Which one is it?

I posted BEV'S WORDS tonight. I demonstrated BEV'S HISTORY tonight. I issued a "buyer beware" to DUers tonight. Attack the messenger if you want, but pay attention to what is going on, and quit indulging yourself in fanatic defense of someone who is, more and more daily, appearing to be unworty of such defense.

I didn't respond because I live in Central Time Zone, and was getting ready for bed. I checked back in once before I shut things down for the night. You wanted a response, there it is. I don't LIVE on DU, however, so sometimes you will just have to wait for people to respond. That doesn't mean that what they have said holds no water. To argue otherwise only further demonstrates the cult of personality that you guys have created around Bev, which is sullying your objectivity. If a republican had done half of what she has, you guys would have been on it like stink on shit.

[standingup]

19. Would you please

provide a link to the thread with your post of BEV'S WORDS.

Thanks

[Maddy McCall]

20. here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=100808&mesg_id=100808

And the other is lower in this forum, and I don't have time to post the link, but just search Bev and Cigar and you should be able to find it and associated threads.

goodnight.

[standingup]

21. Thanks

[Must_B_Free]

24. Problem is

that lawsuit thing is a total red herring. SHe quotes on thing that sounds like a threat (and it is) but it is divorced from the context where Bev clearly explains that she has legal obligation s for the status of her organization that she can't let others ruin for her.

The cigar thing? She was in a PR and marketing firm and one of her partners sold these things. So what? it's like selling Billy Beer.

Strong willed people aren't always loved, but they are appreciated.

[Maddy McCall]

25. Explain that Bev said she wouldn't go on Olbermann because...

he said that she couldn't use the "f-word," yet he has responded to another DUer who wanted to verify that, that he NEVER told her that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x102079

Red herrings? Look at Bev. She keeps throwing them up everytime she gets caught being dishonest.

[tommcintyre]

54. "This isn't about me" ITS ALL ABOUT YOU MADDY

You though you saw a moment of weakness you've been waiting for, and have tried for hours to discredit one of the people that have most helped the election fraud cause.

You have only succeeded in discrediting yourself. I think most of the people that have read your garbage have figured you out.

[aquart]

46. Maddy McCall. A very busy girl.

It would be wrong to say she worked a full eight-hour shift.

[rehema]

8. Don't Take your eye off the prize--

so-called Bev/Keith O war suspect

[YellowDoginthehouse]

9. my point exactly, thank you. n/t

n/t

[Must_B_Free]

10. I don't get it

what did the poster mean?

[YellowDoginthehouse]

13. The poster thinks that this is a contrived diversion.

I also noticed that Maddy didn't answer my question, so that just confirms my ideas.

[Must_B_Free]

14. well, I am honestly suspicious of Olberman

but I think he has a right to be honestly suspicious of Bev...

I think that's what's going on; and why Randi can't talk about it, noone with credibility at stake wants to jump on Bev's bus as long as she is the driver, cause it's her way or the highway.

[tommcintyre]

26. YES, MADDY AVOIDS THE QUESTIONS THAT DON'T SUIT HIM/HER

I repeatedly asked her why she chose today (when Bev was being criticized by some) to launch this attack on "old news". In repeated posts she avoided/ignored/refused to answer the question, and finally "lost it" and called me "fucking paranoid" in exasperation.

One thing is clear, Maddy has a hidden agenda (she's just unwilling to share it). She is trying to manipulate us for her own ends.

It is interesting how she tried to paint all of us that "called her on her shit" as paranoid and/or part of a "cult of personality".

Personally, I would not have done everything just as Bev or Olbermann has done; but that's the way it alway is. There are differences of opinion, and those that become our leader(s) are "human" (have personal weaknesses, make mistakes, etc.). I think we must look at the "big picture" (overall results), rather than the individual actions/motivations.

With this measuring tool, Bev/Keith VERY GOOD; Maddy, VERY BAD. Look at the chaos she has caused. What she has done is certainly a net loss, while Bev/Keith is clearly a net gain.

Overall, maybe this is a good sign. Could it be that our persistent actions here has significantly helped to push Kerry back into this? (Olbermann sure said so.) Could we be closing in on something(s) BIG? Could this be why the "rabble" came out of the wood work tonight? <Jeez, I better stop asking so many questions or you all will think I'm paranoid ;~} >

If anything, all this has encouraged me even more to do what I can on my end. I'm going to go back and fine tune my "stuff" (see below), and, time permitting, prepare a "little surprise" to help the people rallying this weekend.

btw: A little tip. If you keep asking freepers, trolls, and "oughta be's" to explain their REAL motives over and over again (as they inevitably avoid answering the question to your satisfaction); eventually they will explode! Well, OK, not really (wishful thinking on my part ;~}). But at least they (like Maddy) do get exposed for what they really are to others.

take care...


http://www.independentmediasource.com/voteintegrity.htm

Tell the U.S. Senators you want them to contest the Presidential election!

The U.S. Representatives are ready to do it. All it takes is just one Senator to sign on too! In 2000, not even one would! Let's not let this happen again! Email them all and let them know how you feel!

http://www.independentmediasource.com/senatevote_individ_sa.htm
http://www.independentmediasource.com/senatevote.htm

[KSAtheist]

11. Bev.

I fully support the recount efforts, but I'm wary of Bev. Until she produces something of substance, I believe she should be treated with the same skepticism that we show Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al.

If we scorn their fanaticism, yet turn a blind eye to our own, then we're in danger of being majorly outflanked. And the last thing we need is another pied piper leading us into oblivion.

[Maddy McCall]

12. You said this better than I could.

But skepticism is unhealthy, evidently.

You are right, too, about the fanaticism. What an excellent post!

[tommcintyre]

27. "What an excellent post! " Ah.. you reveal yourself once again!

You must think the people here are really stupid! Praising someone with 20 posts that compares someone that's working hard on the election fraud issue to Fox news personalities? HA HA HA HA!

Thank you for being so stupid! You discredit yourself.

[Maddy McCall]

44. Yeah, your 666 posts are equally as impressive.

:eyes:

Get over your hatred of me and open your eyes.

[tommcintyre]

51. Why would anybody hate you Maddy? Pity would be more appropriate

You are pretty pathetic.

btw: It's the low posts, along with such an obvious comparison, that only a freeper could make (or praise - "excellent" - Maddy?).

Keep "quacking" Maddy. You make yourself sooo easy to recognize.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

56. Sharing skepticism but still hopeful

I have been skeptical since her infamous "lawsuit" posts. I also feel that she could do a better job of staying in contact with her supporters, through simple emails, and/or keeping her website up to date, clarifying some of the possibly misleading or incorrect statements that were made there, and providing more progress reports.

I expected there to BE some actual progress by this point, and maybe there has been, but I have seen no proof that she has done anything to really make any impact in obtaining recounts in Florida or anywhere else. No matter how busy she is, I should think, with all the money (and it must be a LOT) that she must have received through donations, that she would be able to pay for some assistance in the areas she can't handle alone.

All that said, my skepticism will prevent me from donating anymore money to BBV, and from referring any more people to her. But I remain hopeful that she IS working hard, and taking what she thinks are the right steps to achieve the same goals we are. I think she would be wise to start backing up her claims with tangible evidence, cut with the cloak and dagger business and accept Olbermann's offer to be on his show.

That's my 2 cents (ps--don't you ever sleep? ;)

[Must_B_Free]

15. What about the CA lawsuit?

What about the demonstration of how easy it is to change votes with Dr. Howard Dean?

Who organized teams of people to go over the source code and find the holes?

Who delivered the internal diebold memos?

The fact is, Bev found the Gems software in the first place, without her, we'd be basically nowhere. This has been her baby since day 1. Maybe that's why she's so defensive about it.

[Maddy McCall]

17. Bullshit. David Allen did a huge hunk of this work...

along with other DUers who Bev so embittered that they walked away from BBV altogether. She can't take credit for the whole thing, as much as she would like to.

[Must_B_Free]

18. Who found the Gems software and brought it to everyone's attention?

[LittleClarkie]

22. I don't think that anyone is saying she hasn't done good work

But there have been reports before this to indicate that there is rather a large ego there, that she can be a grandstander, and/or a bit too much into the dramatic.

I also didn't appreciate the "Kerry lawyers told to destroy evidence" story last night coming from her camp.

I think it's just important to realize that these people are human. Sadly, we don't often get to pick our standard bearers and whistleblowers. So she isn't perfect. As long as her personality flaws don't get in the way of the work she's trying to accomplish, I'm cool.

I appreciate Keith letting us know of his concern that Bev is getting in her own way. And I wish we wouldn't forget that he has been almost the only one consistently reporting this story. I'm not ready to eat Bev. But I'll be damned if I'm going to turn on Keith either.

We are going to destroy ourselves from the inside out, and then there won't be anyone left to trust, or to help in the fight.

Come on people. We need to hang together here. This is bigger than Bev, or Keith, or Kerry or anyone else we may be contemplating cooking up for lunch.

[Must_B_Free]

23. Bev is most definitely a grandstander

forcefull, determined... all of these things have worked for her. I can't think of another activist who has instigated anything like what she has done, Kristin Breitweiser perhaps...

I was one of the first to attack her, because I was skeptial that she was leading us into some legal trap telling us to download the source code, but she successfully defended that allegation to my satisfaction.

Keith, I'd like to keep the faith, but I was also an Aaron Brown fan and was a little disillusioned with is pre election stuff and his jumping on the bandwagon of "moral values" etc. He claims he writes and edits his show as if it doesn't tow some corporate line.

These shows are products that the networks sell because there is a market for them, but they are still only working within a limited framework of tolerance. Yes, but he still has the same whore personalities as content feeders - Jeff Greenfield, Bill Schneider, Candy Crowley, John King -the same whores that are all over the network.

When it comes doen to it, a corp exists only to grow and make money. You can't trust a corp. They are all about poisoning the airwaves to their advantage.

[trumad]

28. Come on Maddy, admit it, you're Fridda.

Here's the thing about you Maddy...you're a coward for re-registering under a new name and rehashing all this old shit. The old Cigar story? LOL

[Maddy McCall]

32. I'm who???

I have no earthly idea about what you speak! How well do you know NSMA? Zombywoof? Dookus? Misunderestimator? arwalden?

All of them know me and can vouch that I am NOT someone named fridda, nor have I EVER participated in the Bev controversy before last week.

How dare you call me a coward because I changed my name from jchild to Maddy McCall to tributize my scottie that died right after I joined DU! Don't believe that either? PM NSMA with a link to this post and ask her if I am who you say I am and if this post is not completely honest!

How dare you.

[trumad]

37. How dare I?

first off, I wans't referring to your recent name change.

And if this is the first time bashing Bev, why so? Why not before when it really got heated between David and others. If you're a student of those past threads you will note that I took up for David in a big way regarding that episode.

Here's the deal..... Does Bev have some warts....I think so... She could have handled many things much better than she has.... But you know what? The issue of paper trails and hacked voting machines is much more important than Bev Harris, Jchild, David, or Trumad. Bev Harris, Andy, etc, has pushed this issue into the mainstream more than any of us and that inclueds Mr. Keith Oberman. You hopping on DU the last couple of days to rehash Bev's old sins because she had the audacity to take on Teresa Lapore really sucks. Bringing up the Cigars??? Come on... are you fucking serious? You went to far there and that is why I am going to take you on with this issue.

Sorry Maddy but you're a cut and paster looking for some attention here... You have no dog in this fight.

[Maddy McCall]

40. So you go from accusing me of being someone else, and now...

you dismiss me as a cut and paster. So, which is it? Am I someone who once had a dog in the fight or just someone seeking attention?

Jeez, make up your mind.

[tommcintyre]

55. "and now..." Muddy? just pathetic n/t

[aquart]

50. Go Trumad.

[leftchick]

33. wasn't she Fredda?

anyway, this shit is such a waste of energy.

[Maddy McCall]

38. I never was anyone but jchild...If I have to have skinner prove it,

I will.

[LittleClarkie]

45. Well, duh, people

Just look at her profile. Registered since 2003. How could Maddy have reregistered under a new name, when she's been around since 2003 as jchild.

Yikes people.

Knives and forks at the ready I see. Just waiting for the bibs with Maddy's picture on it? I hear she's good with melted butter.

[trumad]

39. LOL

Good old Fredda..... I'm still convinced that Fredda was a dude and worked for Diebold.

[leftchick]

42. absolutely! along with....

TFHP!

[tommcintyre]

35. Well... a freeper is more like it! Ck out post 11 and 12 - you decide n/t

[Maddy McCall]

36. Is that your only response to the issues I have raised tonight?

To call me a "freeper?" Well, let me tell you that much more established duers than YOU know me and KNOW that I am NOT a freeper.

Find another line of attack. This one AIN'T workin'.

:eyes:

[tommcintyre]

48. If it quacks lke a duck, it is a duck! Post 11 and 12 further expose you!

I said let others decide. You hung youself there. Quick! maybe it's not too late to edit your response in 12!

And you know that's not my only issue with you. I've been following you, doing "damage control" for hours. You are like a bad virus that infects one thread after another.

And, you have avoided answering the question I keep posing to you. Remember me.. the "fucking paranoid" one as you put it?

"WHY DID YOU CHOOSE TO ATTACK WITH OLD NEWS NOW (YESTERDAY), WHEN SOME WERE QUESTIONING BEV'S ACTIONS IN FLORIDA?

What are your REAL motives? If it was such a "big deal", why did you "lie in wait" for her, and ambush her today?

CLEARLY, YOU ARE TRYING TO MANIPULATE US FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES!

[aquart]

49. Dear God, not FREDDA!!!

Good ol' Fredda!

[samfish]

34. You're over thinking this.

First, the whole thing on not trusting 'a corp' is outta whack. You're becoming paranoid, I'm afraid to say, with words like that, and drawing a line in the sane where you don't need to over this whole situation.
Do corporate run media stations have some control over their content? Yes. But no where NEAR as much as people on the left AND right seem to think they do. It all comes down to being human, really.
But the guys who are running General Electric AREN'T sending memos to Olbermann's producers. There is still a maze of legal mumbo jumbo these mega corporations have to do to.
Hell, do you have any idea how much it takes for something tiny like DC and WildStorm comics (both of which are owned by Time Warner) to do a Superman/Mr. Majestic cross over?
My point is, corporation's top brass can't and don't control what specifically goes over the air waves. What they CAN do is hire people who'll probably hire other people who'll in turn hire producers, anchors, board controllers, etc, who will slant the news to a certian degree.

But getting back to the main topic...
Yes, Ms. Harris has done some fine work PRIOR to the election. But since then, she has yet to produce a single shred of evidence, as far as I'm aware, to back up any claims she has posted upon her website.

"Look what I found! A gold nugget!"
"Really? Lemme see it!"
"No! I'll show you later!"

Personally, I agree with Keith Olbermann on this issue. I'm sure Ms. Harris is working for a noble cause, still...but Olbermann raises a damn fine point as to why everyone should be a bit more skeptical of her.
To be honest, I just shake my head when I see a new thread about something that Bev Harris has found, usually. It's always either insignifigant of unsubstanciated.
"They threw out voter receipts and I've got video!"
"Awesome! Show it to us!"
"NO!"

Now, aside from the somewhat obvious point that that specific incident was a localized event and, as a result, looses all it's momentun before it gets out of the gate, SHe's ALSO apparently not letting the big media companies have access to this stuff.

I mean...are any of you REALLY still wondering why the media hasn't fully grabbed this story? They're not going to unless we give them a smoking gun that points to wide spread vote manipulation/fraud.
I'll wager that the only reason they are now is because of the increasing amount of reports in local news papers and that Olbermann is (probably) starting to see a bump in viewship.

If there is some stupid "war" now going on between Keith Olbermann and Bev Harris, logic dictates that you side with Keith. Atleast he's given us something tangible and legit (and has been brutally honest) since the bombs started dropping on November 3rd.

[tommcintyre]

29. "same skepticism that we show Limbaugh, Hannity" 20 poster?

Gosh.. who must you be? You guys gotta learn to be a little more subtle then this! (Just because we're nice, doesn't mean we're stupid.

Really!

[aquart]

47. Describe "something of substance."

What would be acceptable?

[tngledwebb]

30. Hard to figure it all isn't it?

Anything is possible, even bringing DU into it as a way to bring the key players down, or by disruption/disinfo trolls and tactics, right before our eyes. Our enemy has the motive, money and power to do so, and has been at it on other 'CT' related forums for years, imo.

But one thing is certain, MSM will never give validity to the fraud story, and will never allow Olbermann or anyone else do so. The likely scenario is a Dan Rather set-up, sooner or later, bet you dollars to donuts.

[Pachamama]

31. Don't know, but just read Olbermann's blog, and I have to admit, this, my

intuition and the posts and behavior of Bev, does make one wonder about continuing backing her....I'm not suggesting that the work she is doing is done with malice, I think that it started off sincerely, I think that she did democracy good with her discovery of the GEMS code and some of the work she has been pursueing. But somewhere along the line, it seems ego, fame etc seems to be distracting her from the original motivation.

Its been said that Bev is a former PR person, yet when I look at her website, its very weak, has poor navigation or user friendliness and when I suggested that the site get some help (I even emailed her directly, offering to get her in touch w/ contacts I have in Seattle that could help her w/ the website & PR & never got a response). I also had DUers jump all over me for suggesting she needed help w/ her website and to give her a break since she was "so busy". I let it slide, although it didn't change my opinion that the BBV site wasn't helping her & that it was terrible for the cause, especially if its the 1st interface someone has to the topic - its confusing. When Bev posted yesterday about her serving LePore and videotaping it, when I suggested that she team up with Michael Moore and that I'd love it if we could see the footage, she responds by saying that I should go to Votergate.tv .... huh? There is nothing there as far as I'm concerned (except self promotion)and that response does seem odd to me and very much more along the lines of making me wonder if she is really more interested in self-promotion. I'm still waiting for the video/pix of the "garbage bag full of tapes raid" she claimed to have. Now after also reading Bloggermann

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

I'll admit that this and my intuition tells me that the "Seattle Grandma" who started out with the best intentions for Democracy, took a detour along the way and is now not someone I want to be "hanging up all my hopes" on. Her credibility is coming up short and its her own doing, not others....Ironic, because it seems her own self-promotional efforts will have turned her from heroine/folk hero to someone causing lack of credibility and undermining the cause.

Very worrisome...

[tommcintyre]

41. "hanging up all my hopes" on"??? Just NOT on Maddy

Why EVER hang all your hopes on anybody? Just accept what good she may continue to produce. She is hardly the "face" of the vote fraud movement. She is just one of many (probably more to come). How about Ida, or Hedda, or Jesse for that matter? How 'bout JK now?

"wonder about continuing backing her" What does that mean? Sending money? That probably has tapered off anyway. Just don't try to undermine her, like Maddy does. Bev, or any of the peeps mentioned above, may do something you consider inappropriate - that's either a difference of opinion, or being human. But that doesn't change the truth. It makes no sense to worry about one person, or one incident "making us look bad". Just worry about overall advancing the cause, and most importantly, what YOU are doing to help or hurt the situation.

There is no doubt, all the people mentioned in this message have overall helped the cause, EXCEPT MADDY. SHE SHOULD BE TRULY ASHAMED OF HERSELF, BUT I DOUBT SHE HAS THE SENSE OR DECENCY TO BE.

[Maddy McCall]

43. Hate the messenger.

That's ok. I'll live. :hi:

[Pachamama]

52. Hey Newbie Tom, don't go attacking DUers that merely state their opinion

and a valid concern at that...

If you have spent any time on the DU, you'd know I'm a fair person, a big supporter of democracy and as outraged as any about the election and what I consider to have been a fraud.

I don't know anything about Maddy or her/his motivation, this was a statement that came from me, Pachamama, and using my intuition. Maddy may have it out for Bev, but she brings up valid points that many of us have been wondering about. Attacking someone for critical thinking and questioning is just not very DU-like in behaviour.

I have supported Bev's efforts financially and sent folks info about her...I have never, ever in my life "hung hopes on one person" or persons and I don't need lectures from you on this...I'm also fully aware of this cause and whose working towards it more than you know...

[tommcintyre]

59. Don't pull that "Newbie" garbage, and you weren't attacked...

I've seen this pulled a (fortunately) few times with other relatively newer posters. Frankly, such a comment shows a lack of class and weakness. It's akin to pulling a "race card", or even a racist comment. Frankly, it's an attempt to dominate, not through logic or reason, but instead a form of bullying. You have no idea of the level of knowledge or expertise of someone with only one post. ALL DESERVE EQUAL RESPECT. (It's very unbecoming for a progressive to act in such a manner.)

Also, if you can't handle constructive critism (a critique of your comments), it doesn't matter how many posts you have or don't have, does it?

[aquart]

53. Do you intend to sound like a disappointed suitor?

You had all these ideas which weren't respected. So obviously something is wrong with Bev.

You sure that's the tone you want to project?

[Pachamama]

57. Explain further please...

It's late, so its maybe me, but explain your question, I'm not following clearly what your asking....which ideas, what tone? :eyes:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

58. I hate Chimpy, Rove, Cheney, and Condi in that order

[The Flaming Red Head]

60. Lead a movement and damned sure someone’s going to crucify you.

[tommcintyre]

61. Yep.. there's an old saying: You're not doing anything if their not talkin

about ya. ;~}

[Sideways]

62. Tom Check Your In Box

EOM