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 : Election Fraud Reports -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (538)	4/20/2005 3:59:59 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 1729

Chris, Don't think you'll impact Glenn. He's a Republican. That makes him impervious to the truth, to integrity, to honor and to decency. His only shred of hope is that he's a loyal fascist and Nazi and that he'll be rewarded for helping to destroy democracy. He's beyond Stepford. He's into total Big Pharma Frankenstein. You simply have to give up hope on some people. Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling and Bernie "the Worm" Ebbers are totally irremediable. They have crossed over into a state that we call avatars-from-Hell. Glenn is assiduously doing everything he can to extirpate every human emotion, notion of decency and sense of fair play he ever had in order to be on the winning team in the End Days. Have we checked the Rapture Index lately? raptureready.com Glenn knows which asses to kiss. Glenn knows that telling the truth is optional. Glenn knows that morals are optional. Why don't we acquiesce to these obviously advantageous Republican criminal attitudes? What's wrong with being decent? Glenn can't explain his indifference to truth, decency and morality to me. Can you?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (538)	9/20/2005 2:26:19 AM
From: Glenn Petersen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1729

The Carter-Baker Commission has weighed in with their recommendations. Panel Suggests Ways to Improve Elections By WILL LESTER The Associated Press Monday, September 19, 2005; 10:28 PM WASHINGTON -- A private commission trying to restore public confidence in national elections recommended on Monday requiring a free photo ID for voters, drawing opposition from Democrats and some voting rights activists. Critics suggested that having to acquire the ID cards in order to vote could be an obstacle for minorities, the poor and older Americans and might intimidate some people. "We believe such a requirement would constitute nothing less than a 21st century poll tax," said a letter from Reps. John Conyers, D-Mich., and John Lewis, D-Ga. Poll taxes were once used in some states to prevent black citizens from voting. Former President Carter, a co-chair of the commission, said he was hesitant about the free photo ID proposal at first, but laws passed in some states like Georgia convinced him that a national approach was a better idea. Republican lawmakers in Georgia pushed through legislation that requires a new voter identification card that costs $20 for five years. "Some states have passed abominable laws that are a disgrace to democracy," Carter said. In Atlanta, voter and civil rights organizations challenged the Georgia law in federal court, contending in a suit filed Monday that it would disenfranchise minorities and the poor. Nineteen states require voters to show identification; five request photo ID, the National Conference of State Legislatures said. The commission proposed that voters who don't have the card could cast a provisional ballot and produce the photo ID later. States also would have to promote the photo ID card aggressively. Two principal Democratic sponsors of legislation aimed at dealing with shortcoming of the 2000 election _ Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the House minority whip _ also said they are concerned that the photo ID requirement could disenfranchise voters. In a statement, they said the proposal "strikes us as unnecessary and indeed unwise." The commission recommended improved voter registration lists, requiring a verifiable paper trail for electronic voting machines and rotating regional primaries, while warning that "Americans are losing confidence in elections." "Some foreign countries have gone far beyond us in making sure that voting procedures and registration of voters is at a high level of true democracy," said Carter, who has monitored elections around the world. Carter's co-chair on the private commission, former Secretary of State James Baker, acknowledged that "there is room for improvement" in a system he believes remains strong. Among the recommendations of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, organized by American University: -- Top elections officials in states should be nonpartisan and selected by a large majority of the legislature as a way to cut down on partisanship. -- States should develop registration systems that allow easy checks of voters from one state to another and the purging of outdated voter records. Carter and Baker presented the plan to President Bush on Monday and talked about their plan at the Capitol. Later, Bush thanked them for "the excellent work" and said he looked forward to working with Congress on the recommendations after he reviews them. "It is critical to maintain America's trust in our election system," Bush said in a statement. Carter and Baker said they thought the recommendations would deal with problems in the system that remained in spite of a federal law passed after the 2000 elections between Bush and Democrat Al Gore. A rotating regional primary, with Iowa and New Hampshire still leading off the voting, would allow more people to have a say in the choosing of a nominee because fewer than one in 10 voters now cast a ballot before the nominee is decided, Carter said. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin led efforts to get the rotating regional primary approved by the nation's secretaries of state a few years ago. He has his doubts whether it will sell. "The problem with the Carter-Baker Commission is exactly the problem with the National Association of Secretaries of State," Galvin said. "We're both bipartisan and there's nothing bipartisan about scheming for presidential primaries." ___ On the Net: Commission on Federal Election Reform: american.edu washingtonpost.com