Felony laws as an impenetrable shield against electoral fraud.

drm604

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 01:05 AM
Original message

Felony laws as an impenetrable shield against electoral fraud.

Felony laws as an impenetrable shield against electoral fraud, is this a new Republican talking point?

In this DU thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x431313 I commented on an idiotic remark made by a Diebold spokesman:

Check out this article in the Salt Lake Tribune on the recently discovered security flaw in Diebold touch-screen voting systems. In it Diebold spokesman David Bear is quoted as saying "It's only a vulnerability to those who would commit a felony."

Now, in this recent Brad Blog article we have this:

EXPOS�: Security Breaches for 'Sleepover' Voting Machines Used in Busby/Bilbray Race Invalidated, Decertified Their Use in the Election!
San Diego County Registrar Admits to Security Lapses Which Would Nullify Legal Use of Systems According to Both State and Federal Requirements, Provisions!
Registrar of Voters Not Concerned, Says Poll Workers would 'have to want to commit a felony, which knocks out most of our poll workers'

This is two instances of this same excuse. Is this a new tactic, pretend that it's secure as long as tampering is a felony? What I find really amusing about this last one is that the registrar says that it "knocks out most of our poll workers".

MOST? MOST? Oh, okay then. As long as MOST of them are trustworthy we needn't be concerned about those one or two others. :sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

drm604

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message

1. Wow, 4 recommends but 0 responses?

I guess my expository skills leave you all speechless. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

EFerrari

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Considering the forum, I'd take it as an extreme compliment.

Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 07:35 PM by sfexpat2000

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bleever

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. Yep.

:thumbsup:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tinrobot

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 07:36 PM
Response to Original message

3. Most?

That must mean some poll workers are felons.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MissWaverly

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 07:46 PM
Response to Original message

5. I think this falls under the category:

It's not a crime when we do it

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

McCamy Taylor

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 07:51 PM
Response to Original message

6. Ha! What Department of Justice is enforcing the law? Not ours.

Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 07:53 PM by McCamy Taylor

"It only takes one man to steal an election, the Attorney General of the United States"

This needs to be on bumper stickers and buttons with pictures of either Gonzales or Ashcroft.

For sake of argument: many states have laws against couples engaging in oral sex, but since these are never enforced, straight couples have oral sex all the time, even though they are technically "felons". Moral: If the law is not being enforced, there is no law against it. Try this one the next time someone on the right uses that lame excuse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

autorank

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 09:50 PM
Response to Original message

7. K&R. This is extremely important and an ingenious post.

Very, very elegant. You're making us think so here's the result: 1) the vulnerability exists to go into the machine (UT) and 2) a machine(s) used in the San Diego race was in the home of an election official.

This leads us to conclude that fraud cannot be ruled out in San Diego since th opportunity for fraud exists. They need to make sure the machine was in the home of one of those "non felons." That's the Diebold argument here you're getting at - only "felons" fool around with the vote, non felons, forget about it.

We need Colombo! Excellent post.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

drm604

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. I really like pauldp's response in that other thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=431313&mesg_id=431566

So tell me Mr. Bear, do you mean felons like the ones Diebold hired
for their mangement team? At least five of them convicted for felonies I believe.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

autorank

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #8

10. I can just imagine the ad's now...

This might be a means of Diebold indicating that they actually oppose felon diesnfranchisement...they hire enough of them;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

drm604

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #7

9. Thank you, but I really hadn't thought it through all that far.

I just noticed similar statements (IMHO, idiotic statements - idiotic to the point of hilarity) made by two different individuals in two separate, but related, cases and I thought it was notable.

I wonder if this particular talking point is coming from some single source. It might be interesting to try to track down any other instances of someone trying to make this point (that the vulnerability only exists if there are lurking felons). Maybe we could see some connections between the people making it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

emlev

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #7

11. Not only opportunity, but means and motive as well. The big 3. EOM

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

emlev

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jun-15-06 11:47 PM
Response to Original message

12. They're playing to the stereotype of pollworkers here. But...

Those who would rig or hack the election had access to the information in advance that these machines would be sent home with pollworkers. All it takes to become a pollworker is to sign up. So we're not talking just about the experienced pollworkers who might become felons but perhaps also about experienced felons who might become pollworkers.

Remember those Kelly Temp ads from SF for people to deliver voting machines to polling stations???

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 15th 2024, 12:45 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.