Has anyone seen "Murder, Spies and Voting Lies" yet?

[Fly by night]

I hear it was shown in Columbus this weekend, as well as being shown on LinkTV. If anyone here has seen the film (a documentary by Patty Sharaf which focuses on the Clint Curtis story), please post here. Thanks.

[KaryninMiami]

1. Hi Fly- I've seen the film before the final edit -- it's terrific!

Also, if it is not scheduled in your area, please tell people to order it and have house parties so we can get it distributed around the country.

http://votinglies.com/

Here's a trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeXpwabuUbY

[Fly by night]

2. I got through to Patty this morning -- she's sending me several copies.

Can't wait to see it. It sounds like lots of folks saw it in Columbus and on LinkTV this weekend. Certainly created a stir on my answering machine and email-box.

[Stevepol]

21. I totally agree. The trailer leaves out much of the Yang stuff, the real heart of DVD.

This film could have a much greater impact than even Uncounted. It's really powerful.

[Stevepol]

3. The trailer looks like dynamite! This could take the nation by storm!!

[OnTheOtherHand]

4. MORE steaming exit poll crap?

Amazing. Isn't there a director in the country creative enough -- or sufficiently assiduous in fact-checking -- to leave that out of the message?

Oh-kay, whatever.

[Fly by night]

6. God, your one-hand-clapping exit poll mantra is such a tiny prism through which to view the world.

As far as I know, the Clint Curtis story has nothing to do with exit polls. Like this new film, "UNCOUNTED" and "STEALING AMERICA: VOTE BY VOTE" also cover much more election fraud territory than you seem willing or able to admit, even four years after the 2004 election theft. It's not only myopic and mighty tiresome, but it diminishes anything you might say about other evidence for election fraud, when you get around every blue moon or so to acknowledging that.

We know what you think about exit polls. Give it a rest, would ya'? Tell me, do you ever think about anything else? If not, it must be a pretty monochromatic world you live in.

We are arranging a showing of "Murder, Spies and Voting Lies" in Nashville. Hopefully, we'll double-feature it with "STEALING AMERICA". The election fraud mattress is stuffed to the seams with evidence, despite the nit-pickers who can't feel the mattress for the pea (or non-pea).

[OnTheOtherHand]

7. mine?!

Did you watch the trailer, or didn't you?

Go ahead, shoot the messenger, not for the first time.

ETA: As for Clint Curtis, I've said a lot about him. I assume you know that. Whatever.

[L. Coyote]

8. Actually, we need to be ever vigilant about the truth.

There are more than a few people who want to suppress voting,
and one way to do that is to convey the impression that the vote is fixed.

I see no problem with discourse, frankly.
The problem is like playing wack-a-troll on the Internet.
It does not matter how often falsehoods are countered,
they just pop back up out of another hole somewhere.

Thank goodness some people are willing to stay engaged in the face of
steaming piles of crap constantly plopping from the cybersky!

[OnTheOtherHand]

9. it helps to understand the possible parameters

I was listening to that MCM business, and I guess he thinks that

(1) a bunch of Ohio counties were rigged in 2004 by the dreaded Smartech Attack, so the Republicans could steal as many or as few votes as they wanted in real time.

(2) Republicans stole about 4% of House votes in 2006, but it wasn't enough because they had to commit to a level of fraud several weeks in advance.

Those could both be true, neither one could be true -- and/or lots of other stuff could be true from which those claims could be massive distractions. It kind of freaks me out when some people (not you!) seem not to want to know.

I guess I could add that MCM may think

(3) it's all moot, because an Army brigade is going to shoot us all. Or something like that. It wasn't quite clear to me.

[Nictuku]

5. I've got it set to record

If you have LINK TV, you can see it there. I've been following this story for a couple of years now, and am very interested in seeing it all put together.

[csziggy]

10. Link TV shows four showings in the next week

Tonight at 11 PM
Sunday 10/5 at 8 AM and at 9 PM
Monday 10/6 at 6 AM

All times listed are Eastern.

[Fly by night]

11. Here's a four page review of the film (without a single mention of exit polls)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Murder-Spies--Voting-Lie-by-Rady-Ananda-080929-771.html

How, pray tell, could that possibly be?

Perhaps because the Clint Curtis story stands on its own and is not open to academic interpretation/speculation/manipulation. Clint has spoken often about Tom Feeney's request for Clint to develop a vote-flipping software, and Clint has given sworn testimony and has passed lie detector tests on this issue.

Tom Feeney, the accused (and one of the most corrupt Congress-vermin left in Washington) has so far (four years and counting) refused to be interviewed about Clint's allegations, much less be willing to submit to a lie detector test.

Once again, I am looking forward to seeing this film and I'm glad it was made using footage from our National Election Reform Conference. I am also glad that no exit polls were used (or mentioned) in the creation of this OP or post.

[OnTheOtherHand]

12. DID YOU WATCH THE TRAILER????!!!

If not, maybe you could turn off the fog machine for a few moments and take a look. If you did, then I'm not sure what to make of this response.

I agree that the Clint Curtis story can stand on its own. That's why I was shocked.

[Fly by night]

13. No, I live deep in the woods with dial-up internet service only.

I cannot watch web-streamed videos as a result. But I can read four page reviews of the film, which I hope you did. I now have read two reviews of the film, neither of which mentioned exit polls at all. (In both cases, the reviewers actually watched the entire film.)

You must realize how your fixation for making everything about exit polls gets in the way of conversations about anything else. This thread is just the latest example.

Here's an idea. Why don't we both watch the film in its entirety and then we can post our impressions here. I should have my copy soon (by snail mail) and my guess is that you can watch it on LinkTV right now (or soon). I will try to keep track of how much time is spent discussing exit polls in the film and how pivotal that discussion is for the main premise of the film. You can keep track of how much time is spent on everything else but.

BTW, just because some of us don't want to discuss exit polls with you anymore (four years is quite enough), that doesn't mean that we accept your position. Far from it. I also note that the exit poll industry still exists and that, in about a month, they will again be used to predict the winners of all nationally relevant races before the vote totals are official. For a methodology that is so fraught with peril, error and misinterpretation, it seems to be doing quite well, thank you.

[OnTheOtherHand]

14. then you called me out without knowledge

Pure and simple. You've had a lot to say about me, but you simply didn't know the facts when you jumped down my throat. Again, not for the first time.

If you have an issue with me, you can work it out with me. I am not that hard to find. But this is just ridiculous.

For your information, the 2:10 trailer shows an exit poll graphic at 0:22, and shows two more at 0:33-0:38. That's twice in the first quarter of the trailer, not counting the intro title. Friedman cites the exit polls as evidence about Ohio and Florida. Once again, the exit polls are used as the crap science wedge to establish a presumption that machines have been hacked around the country. I would say they have nothing to do with the Clint Curtis story -- but it wasn't my movie.

At this point, in the continued absence of substantive argument, "doesn't mean that we accept your position. Far from it" basically seems to mean that you just don't care. Which is your prerogative, of course. But I'm not sure why it bothers you so much that I do care.

[Fly by night]

15. I "called you out" because you have exit polls on the brain (without much room for anything else)

Even without seeing the trailer, I had read the reviews and spoken with the director and knew what the bulk of the film was about. I have also met Clint Curtis and have followed his story for the past four years. If exit polls did not exist at all, Clint's experience would still be a disturbing story that demands action, here and elsewhere.

As far as not wanting to engage you on this issue again, I do accept that the exit polls were a serious "smoking arsenal" in 2004 and in 2006. You don't. I also accept that the evidence for Rethugligans' decade-long effort to tamper with the franchise is overwhelming and multi-faceted. It's hard to tell what you believe about much of anything except exit polls.

I stopped typing at you here a while back when I received an unexpected call from a Utah reporter who was planning a hatchet-job story on Kathy Dopp. You had already been highly critical of Kathy with that reporter and (I presume) you expected me to corroborate your story. At the time, the battle over DREs in Utah was raging and I knew that any media story that was critical of Kathy would be spun to discredit her strong arguments against DREs. So instead of repeating your criticisms of Kathy (some of which I do share), I redirected the reporter to do a story on Bruce Funk and his own experience with Rethug election thieves. I also told the reporter that, despite my personal feelings about Kathy (which I did not share with her), I supported Kathy's efforts to get rid of DREs in Utah.

After I finished that phone call, I thought about your referring a reporter to me on such a politically sensitive topic without giving me any "heads up" whatsoever. I also wondered how anyone could be so blind to the potential negative effects of attacking Kathy with the media that they would risk weakening the anti-DRE effort in Utah (and elsewhere) and -- worse -- try to drag me into that counter-productive process as well. It seemed, at best, to betray a lack of sophistication with the media and, at worst, it seemed to place your personality and your professional cred over the goals of free, fair and transparent elections in this country. That is when I stopped responding to you here.

I think you are dead wrong on exit polls and I think you need some serious education on what to say (and what not to say) with the media. I am sure you might be able to find someone to help you with that, but it's not me. As my Daddy used to say, you can always tell an overly self-important man, you just can't tell him much.

Thanks (once again) for trying to high-jack another ER OP unrelated to exit polls. It simply confirms the wisdom of not rising to your bait again. Don't call me (or give any other reporters my phone number); I'll call you. Or not.

[OnTheOtherHand]

16. that's completely untrue

I spend very little time thinking about exit polls. Very little time is needed, because the exit poll results aren't becoming more plausible in retrospect, and the fundamentalists' arguments aren't improving. Kerry still didn't win Pennsylvania and New Hampshire by double-digits. There's really not much room for debate. I realize that a lot of people feel that the exit polls must somehow have been accurate or 'telling' despite it all, and it saddens me that some people are so willing to believe what they are unwilling to defend, but it doesn't leave me much to think about.

(I do roll my eyes when I see your assertion that you "think" I am "dead wrong." Experience and your own words say that you will never stand by that. Yes, I admit, it actually does tick me off.)

So, when I'm not doing my other work, I work on post-election audits, and I chase down all sorts of election fraud/misfeasance allegations to see which ones hold water, which ones are bunk, and which ones are indeterminate. I like to know which are which.

Thanks for revisiting the Utah story, so here is my side, which isn't long: I told that reporter that I largely agreed with Kathy Dopp both about voting machines and about audits, and we talked about those topics as long as we talked about Dopp. Now, if you actually told the reporter that I was wrong about Dopp, then you have that on your conscience. Otherwise, it worked out just fine. So, what's your beef? I probably should have given you a heads up, but were you somehow going to come out in favor of DREs if you didn't expect the call?

I understand why you thought your OP was unrelated to exit polls. That remains the fault of the film-makers.

FWIW, my basic take on the Clint Curtis story is that Yang Enterprises has no apparent bearing on elections anywhere -- but if Curtis is right, it certainly tells us something about Tom Feeney.

[Fly by night]

17. "Completely untrue". Except for these parts.

You continue to focus on exit polls here, despite the many other issues we are interested in. I think that's why you are "ignored" by so many here. (More on that later.)

You continue to disparage those who accept that the exit poll/reported vote disconnect in 2004 was real, and provided strong evidence for widespread election fraud (though certainly not the only evidence). In that respect, you are the closest thing to a holocaust denier that I have ever communicated with.

Despite your continual criticisms of exit polls, they continue to be administered in this country and elsewhere and their results continue to be announced almost immediately after polls close as "evidence" for who won the election. If the method was as fatally flawed as George H.W. Bush, Karl Rove and you continue to state, we would not still be using this method to identify "winners" before the final vote totals are released.

You did criticize Kathy Dopp, seemingly in great detail, when you spoke to the Utah reporter. She did not call me to discuss DREs; she called me (at your suggestion) to confirm your criticisms of Kathy. The reporter kept trying to draw criticisms of Kathy out of me, citing your comments that I would corroborate your statements about Kathy. (Why you would say that, and then not alert me to the fact that you had referred the reporter to me to confirm your criticisms of Kathy -- not to discuss DREs in general -- is still beyond me.) I continued to tell the reporter that I would have nothing to say about your criticisms of Kathy, or about Kathy herself, because that would weaken the effort to replace DREs in Utah. After 20 unsuccessful minutes of the reporter trying to get me to confirm your anti-Kathy comments, I was able to turn the conversation to Bruce Funk and to an upcoming showing of "UNCOUNTED" in Utah. (I also referred the reporter to David Earnhardt, who she interviewed and reported on prior to the Utah "UNCOUNTED" showing.)

Your condescending tone, and your unwarranted arrogance, here has been insufferable for quite some time. Most people have simply stopped responding to you here, and it has been clear for some time why that has occurred. Your effort to high-jack this thread is part of a years-long pattern that we have all suffered through for far too long on this forum. Speaking for me, I have had enough.

In my four years here at DU, I have only "ignored" two DUers, neither of whom are still here. You are now the third. Now, before you waste time posting another response here (which I won't be able to read), let me make a suggestion. In all my time here, I have never seen you post a single OP in this forum or in any other DU forum. Why don't you spend some time and energy doing that for a change, instead of continuing to make every OP about exit polls, when they are not. Goodbye.

[OnTheOtherHand]

18. but you won't argue that on the merits

In order to know whether comparing me to a "holocaust denier" is intellectually valid -- setting aside other considerations -- you would have to be willing to discuss substance.

The exit poll discrepancies don't provide strong evidence for widespread vote fraud. That's not just my opinion, it's the working consensus of political scientists and survey researchers. There's no reason for me to concede the point; there's no reason for me to drop the point. As for whether I "disparage" people who think otherwise, well, I'm fairly sure I've never likened any to holocaust deniers -- and I'm always willing to explain my views.

I didn't respond to the OP at all, but I did respond to the trailer, and my response was on point.

I doubt that telling a reporter the truth about Kathy Dopp harmed the cause of banning DREs in Utah, but I respect your decision. I think that Kathy holds lots of well-intentioned people hostage in this way. (ETA: I think it's worth remembering that the context wasn't some story about DREs in Utah; it was Kathy's attack on conference organizers in Minneapolis.)

[Kurovski]

19. Thank you for smoking, OTOH.

How are things in flavor country.

[Stevepol]

20. My copy of Voting Lies just came and it's dynamite.

The first part cites a few of the more obvious statistical anomalies about the election of 04, but quickly moves on to other territory, mainly the very real dangers that Clint encountered when facing the FL mafia led by Tom Feeney, as well as the spy hang-out at Yang Enterprises. Curtis has strong and understandable suspicions about Yang Enterprises as a haven for spies (downloading tons of computer info from NASA e.g., having in their hire a conficted spy, etc.), not just a source for vote-flipping software. Clint's dog was shot, and a self-appointed detective who was investigating Yang and Feeney and told Clint that in a couple weeks he was going to pop the case, ended up dead in a hotel room, supposedly a suicide and no signs of foul play, tho the pix (the cops said there were no pix but later admitted that the pix showed in the film were genuine) show plenty of signs of wounding and blood-spattering. The man's notebooks were all gone of course. The alleged suicide took place in Valdosta GA where suicides are not autopsied. In FL an autopsy is required for suicides.

This DVD is dynamite in my estimation and should be shown far and wide to show just how serious and criminal this vote rigging scandal in FL actually is. It's gripping and powerful. If this receives wide distribution, I can't help wondering how in hell Feeney will keep from being investigated by somebody besides himself or somebody else on the take in FL.