What pissed me off about the hearings today........(Nadler in particular)

[Cheswick2.0]

The one woman was talking about paper ballots and Jerrod Nadler from NY blew her off as if she didn't know what she was talking about. His story was was that paper ballots in NY in some election were easy to defraud. Well duh, Nadler old buddy, you weren't properly prepared to make sure there wasn't fraud. But it can be done and if done correctly paper ballots are the safest way to vote.

What pissed me off is there are hundreds of ordinary democratic activists who know more about this subject than he does. But his attitude was "we are the CONGRESSMEN we know more". They don't and they need to listen to people who do.

I hate to say it but we may have to roll over these fools too. They passed that horrible voters rights legislation a few years ago and what good is it. They simply are not very bright or well informed on this issue. So no matter what their intentions are, they are ineffective at getting the job done.

We have to make sure we do not allow them to screw this up for us again. We elected them and we might really like them, but we have to accept that we need to lead them and not the other way around.

[Marnieworld]

1. That pissed me off too

It was the first time in two hours someone brought it up and he was very dismissive even though she was sighting MIT research.

[Cheswick2.0]

2. I'll bet he would listen if a couple of hundred voters showed up

at his office with the documents proving the research.

[bj2110]

3. But Conyers seemed very appreciative of her issue. I gained a lot of

respect for COnyers today.

[glitch]

4. It is time for a guard change. A lot of people don't get technology

and refuse to get informed. They need to be removed from positions where the need to know tech is imperative.
If they would listen to people who do know and learn from them, or at least defer to their experience, that would be one thing. But to dismiss outright simply because they can't wrap their heads around the problem is intolerable.

Edit - Lynn Landes is very respected. He should have known who she was and all about her research. He made himself look less credible.

[Cheswick2.0]

5. yes and we need to start challenging them

Just because we elected them is no excuse to let them get away with not looking out for our BEST interests.

[smartvoter]

21. Getting the message out is a struggle, in part because of this.

Technological ignorance is a big deal. The "glitch" excuse is one of the aspects that we really need to focus on -- explaining that in the computer/software world, a "glitch" on one machine means it's almost certain the same exists on machines with the same software.

[NVMojo]

59. ...and we are all getting hosed because these idiots don't get

technology. Time for a change.

[Carolab]

6. This is EXACTLY what I keep trying to clear up

that older woman who stood up and said we need a voter verified paper trail was just repeating the "meme" without understanding the TECHNOLOGY. I don't think these congress critters "get it" and that's why this stupid legislation passed. If they had just LISTENED and if that so-called "hearing" with all of those reps from Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia hadn't been rigged by DeForest Soaries we might have had a chance.

WE NEED TO EDUCATE EVERYONE ON THIS AND INSIST ON PAPER BALLOTS, HAND-COUNTED, IN PUBLIC, BY NONPARTISANS. AND SECRETARIES OF STATE MUST HAVE FULL LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT INSTEAD OF BEING "AUTONOMOUS". THIS STUPID LEGISLATION ACTUALLY ALLOWS THEM TO INVESTIGATE FRAUD WITHIN THEIR OWN OFFICES. HOW STUPID IS THAT?

[Cheswick2.0]

11. One disagreement..............there is not such a thing as a nonpartisan

WE need to count with our MOST partisan people. We need small teams with one partisan democrat, one partisan republican and one independent on each team.

[meganmonkey]

28. Exactly, Carolab - National standards, Local control

All paper, all handcounted!!!!

[pleiku52cab]

7. The voter protection act

was a compromise agreed on by the Democrats as the best they could get out of a Republican controlled Congress and administration. It did help with provisional ballots, but no law is worth a damn if it is not enforced. Just look what the repugs did in Ohio and other states to try to block and throw out as many as possible.

[AmerDem]

8. They pretty much all had that attitude ( except for JJ jr )

"we are the CONGRESSMEN we know more"...What's wrong with this picture? Who works for who here? Most if not all of the people asking questions were treated with abruptness and at times disdain. I was pissed after watching that hearing ..still am.

[Stephanie]

9. I am really surprised at Nadler

He is an EXCEPTIONALLY good Congressman - he is MY Congressman. He is apparently clueless on this issue. I guess I should blame myself! He is educable, though, and we should get on it. He's really an awesome guy.

I was shocked when he said that paper ballots have been problematic in NY when we vote on 40 year old lever machines. So if we've had them 40 years, WHAT paper election is he talking about?

[Cheswick2.0]

12. he was talking nonsense..........the machines broke

and they voted on paper or something. But I will bet you Stephani, that if you scratch the surfice you will see that they are all like little boys with a new toy, they want to spiffy new electronic gadgets.
I vote on those mechanical lever machines too and I think they are pretty good. But I am willing to go to all paper ballots. I am NOT willing to go to electronic voting machines.

I would say get to educating him and see if you can get him to agree. Get a commitee and some petitions and let him have it with a dose of reality.

[juajen]

51. I'll say it again

We need to send petitions to congress with thousands of signatures, informing them that we will stay home next election or vote green if we have a candidate, unless all electronic machines are removed in this country. It will be hard, but if the pugs choose who gets elected, we couldn't possibly be worse off. When they are faced with defeat at the polls, they will begin to listen to the people. Gee, imagine that, a congress critter who actually listens to the people they're supposed to be working for. Bless Dennis Kucinich's heart. He is truly an exception, and I can certainly think of others, Conyers and Waters, for instance. Obviously, some exceptions will have to be made.

[Cheswick2.0]

58. I agree we must get rid of the electronic machines

[siddharta]

52. Well, he's from Manhattan

They haven't had the Black Box Plague there yet and the
voting machines there have been pretty reliable? My H
is from NYC, not Manhattan, no complaints.

You are right about the second part, WHAT paper election is he
talking about?

[Old Mouse]

10. NY practically invented stuffing the ballot box

What he was really doing was trying to soothe her down and help the event to proceed. The committee chairman had told her to step down many times and she was refusing. The next step would be to have the Sargent at arms remove her.

Many of those people were using a chance to ask questions to instead read personal statements that were chewing up time. This was not a town hall meeting, it was a congressional session, with rules and procedures. When the chairperson asks you to stop talking, you stop talking and surrender the floor. The congressmen were being more than gregarious because of how obviously upset these people were.

We might think the system is flawed, maybe broken, but you have to pay these people the respect their position commands. They have all put their careers on the line to push this issue for US.

[Cheswick2.0]

13. I hate to be rude but bullshit

They are employees and they can kiss my ass if they think their careers are more important than the right to vote.

[Old Mouse]

17. We still have a system of government in place

It ain't much but its all we got. They don't work for us on a one-to-one basis, so we don't get to walk into their place of work and tell them what to do. There are rules and procedures, we don't throw them out just because of how we personally feel about an issue.

Bushco will destroy the career of anyone who crosses them. It's more immediate for someone who works in politics. Those poor Democratic saps are under constant siege and attack in congress under the Republican majority. If you listened carefully, you would have heard them admit they are powerless to bring charges no matter how compelling the evidence, that this was an attempt to force the media to report the data brought forth.

When the chairperson of a committee in congress tells you to step down, you step down.

[Cheswick2.0]

19. yeahsureright

we have nothing if we don't have a democracy.

[Old Mouse]

23. it seems you have a plan

What would you have them do?

[Cheswick2.0]

25. Act like leaders and know what they are talking about

and be willing to fight no matter what their personal risk.

[Old Mouse]

27. fight who?

Just by having this meeting they have jumped into the fire.

Really, what else would you have them do?

[Cheswick2.0]

37. you are starting to be as transparent as a plate glass window

thanks for kicking the thread.

[Old Mouse]

40. be constructive

what would you have your elected representatives do that they are not doing?

edited to avoid embarrassment

[Cheswick2.0]

60. what part of "you are starting to be as transparent as a plate glass

window" don't you understand?

I think I have made it pretty clear I am not interested in anymore defeatist debate.

[AmerDem]

14. you know what

This soothing you speak of seemed to be the cornerstone through out the entire hearing. Actually it seemed more like Conyers was more in a hurry to get the hell out of there and do other things he really wanted to do. You have to ask yourself, why is it these congressmen don't have the drive and anger we have concerning voting fraud? I mean this is clearly the case. We here talk with such passion and all of us know we were robbed dating back to 2000 but every so called Democratic leader sidesteps the issue or takes the repuke attitude to say nothing or poo poo it. We have a major problem and that problem isn't from the people trying to speak finally on this issue after almost 5 years of no action.

[Old Mouse]

20. I know what you mean

Someone very close to me is very connected in the Democratic machine. He still loves to bash Bush, but suddenly clammed up on the issue of voter fraud. What worries me is that it seems more fear than disinterest.

[AmerDem]

24. fear of what?

What in God's name do these people have to fear? What could ever be so dangerous as to cause a whole group of party leaders to keep their mouth such? I don't buy it but i'm interested in what this so called friend of your's might have relayed to you or what you think might be behind this element of fear.

[Old Mouse]

30. I wish to god I knew

The one thing I have always noticed about career politicians is a belief in the system, sure a willingness to use the system to their advantage, but always a belief in the system. That belief seems to be broken.

My conjecture, and it is only my personal observation, is that the Democratic leadership have discussed and decided that Democracy is already lost, and by becoming more cooperative and appeasing to the Republicans they can diffuse the damage from the media propaganda machine, and at least preserve the appearance of the status quo. It seems like they think Bush has no limits if pushed, and there is some risk they are not willing to face.

[AmerDem]

34. with all do respect

I think your way off base. There are far to many people behind the scenes that would go down in a blaze of glory rather then fear nitwits like Rove of shrub. Some that instantly come to me....Wes Clark, Joe Biden, Senator Byrd, Charlie Rangel...just to name a few.

[Old Mouse]

38. thanks for the respect

and as I said, I don't know. That is entirely my conjecture. I have picked up some small clues, but none of it leaves me with optimism.

I am, however, sure that we are leading the fight, and will need to for a while yet.

[stirringstill]

67. C-SPAN

I think much of the pace of the hearing and in particular Conyers was largely shaped by C-SPAN. I don't think Conyers was in hurry to get the hell out of there, at least not until the Q&A which got pretty ugly.

[ooglymoogly]

29. i was angry to when i saw nadler coming off as a pompous ass

does anybody have a link. i'd like to blast off a missal at that arrogant fart

[Yupster]

56. Tammany Hall was in New York

Long history of vote fraud.

[whistle]

15. The clear message that came through about this hearing. . .

. . . or any investigation or committee or legislation is that if the republicans choose to not attend the meeting, the group has no power to do anything. That statement was made during the hearing and as such nothing will happen. Now, is that because the republicans have the legitimate power or are the democrats just turning over and letting them get away with that? Same thing happens if republicans choose to shut out democrats from committee meetings on legislation such as the bill to pass the 9/11 commission recommendations. A 650 page bill is brought to the floor and NO democrat Rep from the House or Senator was allowed to participate in the drafting of the bill, nor add any amendments, nothing! Yet they are called on to vote sight unseen. Who is at fault here?

I saw Senator Byrd on C-Span earlier today talking to an empty senate chamber. How is this representative government. The majority party is allowed to conduct their affairs in complete secret and democrats can't participate? I think not. The democrats may have to storm the chambers wherever such action takes place and insist on being a part of the process. Otherwise move out of the way and let more assertive people in to do the job.

[Cheswick2.0]

16. yes, they need to fight for democracy

I really don't care about the rules of politiness anymore.

[crispini]

33. You catch more flies with honey....

The rules of politeness are, quite often, highly useful tools for getting one's way.

[Cheswick2.0]

61. we have polited ourselves right out of a democracy

[Old Mouse]

18. exactly

The democrats can't do anything but filibuster now. They can't bring any bills to the floor, much less effect changes or reforms. He clearly said they can't charge anyone no matter the evidence.

[whistle]

22. Then we use the law and the courts and lawyers. . .

. . . and if that fails the people hit the streets with civil disobedience.

[Old Mouse]

26. We do not have most of your options

We do not have the law: Congress would have to pass some sort of no-confidence vote, and with a Republican majority that will never happen, no matter how much the Democrats scream.

The President would have to approve a criminal investigation, and somehow I think it's unlikely he will do that.

So without a court available, who would the lawyers talk to?

Democratic Congressmen were recognizing our civil disobedience today. We have to make enough noise that the Republican congressmen are forced to admit the issue.

[anamandujano]

They cheated to get the majority and the presidency;

It's foolish to be hamstrung by their quasi-legal partisan activities.

I think the question session should have been given freer range.

[Old Mouse]

44. they committed treason to hijack the nation

but the congressmen were using the time they had on television to try to mount a publicity counter-offensive to force the issue into the main stream press.

Reading a multiple page statement was not helpful, making sure everyone in the line got their chance to speak on record was. If he let everyone speak as long as they wanted, we would have LaRouche spokespeople hijack the remaining television time - we would have never gotten to hear the powerful, emotional statement from Julia Davis.

[anamandujano]

47. i do begrudgingly agree with you

but it was painful to watch.

[Cheswick2.0]

62. nonsense

he had a lunch date to get to.

[leftchick]

36. and contrast to the parliament in Britain...

where weekly Tony comes under the gun. Can you imagine chimpy being questioned by congress?!? oy... :eyes:

[DancingBear]

31. Well, at the risk of being clobbered, I'll say this

about the Dems on the panel today.

They showed up. Four hundred and some odd others didn't.

They get that there is a problem.

Are they dismissive at times ? Hell, yes. But please, half those folks in the question lines were there to push an agenda. Sorry, but the "seven paragraph" woman was taking up valuable time - she could have just as easily prefaced her comments by stating she would like this entered into the record, then maybe summarized it. She was grandstanding, and Conyers knew it. While I am sure she was sincere, I believe Conyers acted correctly.

The Dems who cared enough to attend this hearing have been given MORE than enough information to act. If they don't, then we know who to blame. If Nadler doesn't take the time to educate himself in depth on the issue, then we know who to blame.

For now, however, I am not willing to condemn those few "brave" souls (brave here being used in the Congressional sense :) ) who at least came to listen.

We just need to hold their feet to the fire and make sure they act. Even symbolically, to get some MSM attention. We'll all be watching to see what happens when they travel to Ohio.

[Old Mouse]

32. No clobbering here

Hell, I applaud you! You got it exactly.

[Cheswick2.0]

35. thanks for the defeatest talk

just what we need more of.
There was nothing brave about what they did today. If that is the best they can do we are doomed. Hang it up, America is over. I have no interest in them contuing to be paid to pretend there is a democracy in place.

[DancingBear]

39. Oh please

They brought two panels full of people that quoted chapter and verse about what happened in Ohio and elsewhere, they agreed to go to Ohio to further review it, they came out and said they may block the Ohio electors...

Pray tell, what should they do? They have no standing in Congress, they have no prayer of getting ANYTHING passed, and they still have to try and minimize the damage that Bush will do if he gets four more.

Seriously, what would you propose? They are trying, with this hearing, to generate main stream acceptance for an issue that, sad to say, is on the minds of very few people.

I will take ANY help I can get in changing that equation. I think today was a good start.

Don't you?

[Old Mouse]

41. You have at least one fan here n/t

[anamandujano]

45. "minimize the damage that Bush will do"

The dems won't be able to function at all in this congress with the bogus repuke majority. I hope that all of them will stop participating in the charade and lead a citizen's revolt. Jesse Jackson did mention something about going back to the streets. I think he is spotting the early signs. He knows we are going in circles with no way out.

[Old Mouse]

46. Hmmmm

Now that's food for thought...

[DancingBear]

49. The Texas Dems go nationwide?

I like it. :)

[anamandujano]

50. exactly, the texas dems

they were cheered from sea to shining sea and are now folk heroes, and so will our fed congresspeople be if they take up what really amounts to our last stand.

[Cheswick2.0]

63. you are right

I can't believe how spineless some people in this forum are. I guess some people never get tired of appeasment politics.

[cry baby]

53. I believe the snowball started with DU and like minds on the

internet. It has grown a lot. There was a hearing on Capitol Hill today. That is big. What's next? Let's keep the snowball rolling, it's getting bigger each day. Let's get off our comfortable a**es and take to the streets.

[Cheswick2.0]

57. oh please youself

get back to me when there is real reform.
Unless there are people in the street NOTHING real will get done. You know how I know? Because they DID NOT LISTEN to the people who really know what they are talking about. Just because someone is elected to office doesn't mean they know everything.
Those folks had neither the humility or the wisdom to ask the real experts to speak.

[TayTay]

But at least they ar fighting

You are not going to get everything you want without a prolonged, nasty and intense fight. And this is going to take time to process. If we piss off our friends, then we lose. If we find people who are on our side and try and work with them at assembling proof, then we win. (This is also a power issue and nobody ever gives up power or control without a fight.)

I believe something is broken in the voting system. I have to convince a critical mass of voters to give a damn about this and begin to demand that something be done. While I believe something is wrong, not enough of my fellow citizens do. Conyers panel is a step in the right direction. It gives some legitimacy to a hard to understand issue and begins the process of offering some corrections. This fight is not over, it is just beginning.

Eyes on the prize, my friend, eyes on the prize. We might not get relief on this issue in time for 2006. (I hope we do and I will do my part to affect change.) But this issue is starting to bubble up into the public consciousness. And it needs to get there in order to get it talked about by more than us. We need all the friends we can get and purity tests only alienate those who actually might help us.

[Old and In the Way]

42. That was my take too.

Most of the public witnesses were outstanding, but there were a couple that got a bit theatrical. I was concerned that there'd be a few plants that'd go off on some bizarre tract to make the whole hearing look ridiculous....I'm glad that didn't happen.

But ALL of the Democrats should be signing on to this hearing. Democrats best start acting like a real opposition and believe that this election was stolen. Because the next time, it could very well be their seat that'll be gamed.

In the next Congress, they should be refusing to play along with the Republicans until we get bipartisan reform on this most fundemental issue. Do whatever it takes to make the Republicans pay for this criminal behaviour. Refuse role calls for quorums, make every public statement in and out of Congress about election reform. There is no more important business then making sure our vote counts.

[Old Mouse]

48. cool nick...

It makes me wonder if there is an age separation between those who think the Congressmen were doing a good job and those who don't?

[Razorback_Democrat]

43. Few Career politicians are going to really care

what happens as long as they got re-elected

I think our founding fathers would be appalled to see a)people making a career out of being a politician, and b)the elitist attitude that has come into politics

[siddharta]

54. Send them all this link

:D
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE412A.html

[robbedvoter]

55. In NY we have a system that works better than paper ballots

(lever machines). In one county where paper ballots were used, fraud was suspected. Nadler used HIS experience. It's also a good reminder to all that having paper ballots is not a sure defense from fraud - it just offers a chance to check. In Florida, new Hampshire, optical scanners (paper ballots) were responsible for most of the fraud.

[Cheswick2.0]

64. Nadler was clueless

the reason there was fraud with the paper ballots in that case was because they did not have the safe guards in place to prevent fraud.

[siddharta]

65. Not having a paper trail is unconstitional

at least in Florida...how are you supposed to do a recount
if you have these black boxes with no paper trail?
Can Nadler possibly be so uneducated about the black boxes?
The woman Nadler was talking down to was Lynn Landes--someone
who has done extensive research on this topic.

My latest idea, which could change at any moment, is I really think he is educated about the issue, but people know who owns the voting equipment and that they can be put out on their butts if they raise too much of a stink.

Rep. Wexler down here has been trying to just get a paper trail with these voting machines and had his suit thrown out, because, get this,
he was not personally harmed by the machines. Frankly the machines
are so easily hackable this isn't enough.

WE MUST GET RID OF THE BLACK BOXES if we want a fair election!
It's going to have to come from the grassroots. Cliff Arneback
with Common Cause's approach with the proof of fraud, etc. looks the most hopeful. How can someone have a problem understanding there was fraud when 140% of registered voters voting, pretty straightforward,
upfront brazen fraud if you ask me.

We can't have election supervisors who are party hacks.

[ccarter84]

66. problem was, the lady had already done that speech

she did it the day before at the non-partisan forum and really tried to rip Avi Ruben a new one, I just grimaced and hit mute when I saw her on the tv yesterday. A sound point...but it isn't realistic when you present it while in effect screaming