hi, I'm a rare visitor here but I have a serious question

[steve2470]

I'm sure most of you are aware of the recent Diebold scandal video on youtube. Does the corporate media not cover this because it's "conspiracy theory" in their opinion or is it a more cynical reason ? Thanks for tolerating this question.

[Ian David]

1. They don't cover it because they stand to rake-in BILLIONS if McCain wins. n/t

[MadMaddie]

2. They don't cover it because Diebold is a Republican owned

company and if the MSM is owned by 5 major Right wing owners they will not cover it. That is until they are forced to cover it because the internet is hammering a story.

[blm]

3. You think Bush's allies bought control of broadcast media in the 80s and 90s for the public to hear

the truth?

THAT changed everything in news departments across the country. Jack Welch said in the 90s it was time for newsrooms to help profits of the parent company and turned news rooms into their own Public Relations services....unfortunately the parent company was also a major Defense Industry player.

And that's just ONE story. AOL/TimeWarner/CNN's major shareholder is House of Saud. Who are THEY aligned with?

[annunakigohome]

4. Um...or could they be complicit in this thing? Hmm?

I hope to God that Obama has everything worked out. I talked to a volunteer who said they will have college kids as poll watchers, which makes me feel a little better. Imagine a scenario (which has already played itself out in 2004, as well as subsequent years) where citizens on their way to work are standing in long lines, voting, and run into snafus (like the screen bounces to McCain instead of Obama, God forbid). They may just decide to give up out of frustration and a time crunch, and I am sure that there are plenty of the election judges who are retired and not up on much tech stuff to be able to remedy the situation. The voter may just split out of a need to get to work, leaving his or her vote uncast or wrongly cast. I can't see Obama going through almost 2 years of this to allow his election to be stolen by Diebold, Inc.

[liberal N proud]

5. Stick around here long enough and you will get the sense

that the M$M is biased toward the right and isn't going to cover anything that would make the republicans look like the criminals they are.

Theory that they are part of the problem? Most likely.

[Dragonfli]

6. They've ignored the Diebold "inconsistencies"

Since 2002, No matter what.
I am sorry if observing this makes me cynical, but they are well aware of many things regarding election fraud and yet they refuse to cover it. Too many credible reports from credible I.T. sources to justify ignoring it due to being "conspiracy nonsense". I assume following such stories could lead to audit-able elections and an end to some of the corporate gravy train ride the M$M have enjoyed under GOP "leadership".

I am far too cynical so I imagine my opinion would be viewed by most as nonsense.

[AndyTiedye]

7. That is Why the MSM is Hyping the "Bradley" Effect So Much

They tell us that the "Bradley Effect" will cause a red shift of up to 6% of the entire vote.

From this we can infer that the Diebold machinez are programmed to switch 6% of the vote from Obama to McCain.

[kansasblue]

8. Steve, read about Hagel's election in Nebraska

one of the earliest indication of E-vote fraud.

check the books out on www.blackboxvoting.com.

pdf on the right side of the pages

[colorado thinker]

9. You're not that rare

You've had 8300 posts since 2004. I've only managed 500 something. Why do you call yourself a rare visitor?

[steve2470]

10. rare to this sub-forum, that's what I meant :) nt

[DeeDeeNY]

11. The corporate media certainly has no problem covering the phony Acorn story

[garybeck]

12. the media ignores everything related to this subject, period.

the easy answer is they don't want to support conspiracy theories.

the deeper answer is, they are part of the conspiracy.

we know some people in the media have tried to report on the stolen election, and their publishers have sileneced them. (google Robert Koehler, syndicated writer for Chicago Tribune)