When the DNC asks for your money, what should you say?

Stevepol

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jun-28-05 05:22 PM
Original message

When the DNC asks for your money, what should you say?

I've decided to create a letter and save it for use when any of these "progressive" causes comes calling, those that have not raised their voices about the vote fraud.

I'd suggest that some others might want to do the same, if you are like me and can't in good conscience give to an organization when that org won't even acknowledge that the fraud could have happened or should be investigated.

Here's my recent letter (with slight alterations to fit each org) in reply to the DNC's request for money and my own state Dem Party's request. I plan to use it for all other orgs that come begging for money: the ACLU, the NAACP, Nancy Pelosi, or any other person or org that could be raising a ruckus about the vote fraud and isn't.

Howard Dean
Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street SE
Washington, DC 20003

Dear Dr. Dean:

It is with regret that I have to decline to give any money to the DNC. At the moment, I believe it is standing for principles I deeply believe in and I would very much like to give you some money. However, since you and apparently every other representative of the Democratic Party refuse to even acknowledge that electronic vote fraud is even possible, much less something to be concerned about and remedied, I would rather spend my money on those organizations and individuals who are working tirelessly and against great odds it would seem to make people aware of what is quite obvious: that our democracy doesn�t really exist anymore. It has been abducted by the electronic voting machine. I don�t think anything could be any clearer. Let me just mention a few of the reasons that led me to this conclusion. Others would have their own reasons I�m sure since there are by now thousands of good and valid reasons to proclaim fraud.

After the 2002 mid-term elections, I was �stunned� at the result in many places around the country but particularly in GA. There, Roy Barnes, after holding a 9-11% lead in all the pre-election polling right up to 4 days before the election, lost by 5%, a 15 � 16% point swing in 4 days; and Max Cleland after enjoying about a 5% lead in pre-election polling, lost by 7-8% points, a 12 or 13% swing. The exit polls for the election apparently agreed pretty closely with the pre-election polling because they were quickly removed from the internet. In interviews, reps for the polling service said that their polls were accurate within the margin of error (MOE) in every other state where they were used. Only in GA were they wildly inaccurate. I heard Mark Shields mention that only Diebold was being used to count the votes in GA, the first time a voting machine had been used for this purpose uniformly in one state. Naturally, I was suspicious (as he apparently was not since I never heard him mention it again). I got on the internet and very soon discovered that touchscreens cannot even be audited or recounted. The vote once cast and counted in cyberspace cannot even be checked for validity. I won�t trouble you with the other things I found out about the ownership and management of Diebold and its software programming division GEMS (Global Election Management Systems), or about the number of times the Diebold machines were �patched� after certificiation before the GA 02 election or about the fact that ES&S and the Diebold election division are headed by brothers or hundreds of other disquieting facts. These facts and by now thousands of others, all pointing to the likelihood of fraud, are easily accessible to anybody who is reasonably curious and persistent. The facts for the most part can be easily verified, especially by somebody in the DNC or on any big city newspaper in the country. Very few have even bothered to investigate, so apparently you have plenty of company in your lassitude about this issue.

Then there was the 04 election. I told all my friends that I was hoping and praying for a Democratic victory but I didn�t have much faith in this happening since the voting machines were being used too extensively around the country (at the time 80% of the vote was counted on DREs of one kind or another) and it would be too easy for a small handful of dirty tricksters or insiders to patch or fraudulently program or hack into the computers, especially the central tabulators, and I felt sure that Kerry, while he would win the real election easily, would �lose� the computer election once the final results came floating in out of cyberspace. I thought it would happen just as the GA 02 election had happened.

And of course I was right. As the by now hundreds of statistical analyses of the exit poll and actual vote discrepancies in each state and in the country as a whole have shown more or less conclusively and as Mitofsky himself has said (in case you�ve forgotten, Mitofsky is one of those in charge of the official Edison/Mitofsky exit poll for the election that was commissioned by a consortium of networks and other interested parties), it is statistically impossible for the exit poll results and the alleged �actual results� to both be true. Mitofsky himself originally blamed �reluctant Bush responders� for the inaccuracy of his own poll. He offered no proof of this highly speculative conclusion, but it apparently satisfies him, as it must satisfy others.

It did not satisfy many statisticians, among them some of the contributors to the uscountvotes.org group that analyzed the discrepancies as well as the various �bias� explanations for the inaccuracy of the exit polls. I would suggest that you download the studies and working papers at this web site and many many others on the internet and avail yourself of some of the statistical evidence contained therein.

Let me just say one other thing. Even if you distrust statistics, though they be done by the most highly qualified individuals in the country, you surely must realize that it is impossible to have a democracy when the votes are being counted in secret by extreme partisans of one side in such a way that even the elections officials can�t come in the room to check (the source code is off limits) and that it is either impossible to have audits and recounts or, in practice, it is almost never done. This is the state we have come to at present, and apparently only a very few in high places have even the slightest suspicion about this set-up. All it would take to have a democracy again would be this: REQUIRE A VOTER-VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AND RANDOM AUDITS (5% should be a minimum requirement) FOR ALL ELECTIONS WHERE VOTES ARE COUNTED BY ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES.

This doesn�t seem like a terribly lofty or unrealizable goal for your organization to set for itself; at the very least, you should be shouting the facts (which you can easily access and verify) from the housetops and demanding reform of the vote counting procedures in the country. Until, however, I hear you demanding a fair vote count, I cannot in good conscience send you money. It would be money down a rat hole. I will continue to support those who still have eyes in their heads and the courage to act on what they see. I will continue to pray for better results but unless you or others begin to act in unison and demand reform, the next elections will be no different.

My best wishes go with you if, as I hope is true, you are sincere in your support of the values that you profess to believe.

Sincerely,

Steve Carter

P.S. Incidentally, lest you think that I�m a crazy �conspiracy theorist,� let me say that I have an advanced degree and have been teaching for many years. I believe it is generally conceded that conspiracy theories are based on less evidence than the �accepted� interpretation. That is not the case here as you can easily ascertain if you will do the research. The evidence is all on the side of fraud.