Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (452281)	9/4/2003 12:02:05 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Answer, Re: "So maybe a million bucks in debt per job? Not exactly a bargain." Question: Give an example of a clearly absurdly obtuse and unfounded statement. Dan B

To: American Spirit who wrote (452281)	9/4/2003 12:03:32 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

AS, Re: Jeb's cheating machine, they cannot repeat their scam. I don't share your optimism. You speak of scam in the singular, but the reality is that there were multiple scams perpetrated on Democratic voters in Florida. 1) the 90,000 or so people who were scrubbed by ChoicePoint's scheme in 2000 have not had their voting rights restored. Some believe that the Republican Secretary of State, in collusion with Jeb Bush is slow-walking this restitution of rights. 2) voter intimidation in the form of excessive police presence at minority voting locations/precincts actively discouraged voters. This won't be changed in 2004. 3) Poorly announced voting location changes frustrated many voters in low income precincts in Florida in 2000. This will also be the case in 2004. 4) The 'hanging chad' problem is to be addressed by the HAVA bill. But we may be sliding out of the frying pan and into the fire. As Bev Harris dramatically points out in "Black Box Voting", certain special interests created a piece of legislation that is self rewarding (since they manufacture and manage the electronic voting devices) and more than likely fraudulent. Having the Supreme Court rule that the software controlling electronic voting system is "proprietary" and not subject to public inspection is a huge red flag.