Predictable response

[krw]

While they were trying to count the ballots in FL in 2000, Canada held a
federal election all done with old fashioned ballots and black pencils. They
ran the campaign, held the vote, counted the ballots and declared the
winners all while FL still couldn't get the right count.

Ok, so you're volunteering to take all our Democrats?

 

[krw]

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 07:43:17 -0700, Jim Thompson

[...]
I would. Except that the Democrats are coming back into power. Time
to load up on arms and ammo ;-)


Have no fear. The vast majority of the voters may want the Democrats to
win but the president of Diebold is still a Republican. He has promiced
to ensure the *right* outcome.


I guess we Arizonans are way ahead of the times. Back to paper
ballots. Even the handicap touch screens produce paper hard-copies
that can be visually examined before turning in.

...Jim Thompson

Using electronics at voting places in insane. It'll break or be
obsolete/unrepairable in a few years, and costs a fortune. Simple
paper ballots and OCR makes a lot more sense.

You don't even need OCR. Ours look like a large version of an SAT
test. Color in the squares with a sharpie provided and they're
scanned by one machine at the door. There are 30-40 tables set up
so no line. Multiple precincts can use the same reader since the
ballots are scanned. The paper ballot is then available (locked
inside the scanner) for any necessary recounts. It's a very nice
system and certainly cheaper than some dumb PC gizmos.

Same here. Our ballots are HUGE!

These are 8-1/2" x 11" sheets, both sides. We usually have two,
but may depend on the precinct or school district (there are 500,
IIRC).

 

[krw]

[...]
I would. Except that the Democrats are coming back into power.
Time to load up on arms and ammo ;-)


Have no fear. The vast majority of the voters may want the Democrats
to win but the president of Diebold is still a Republican. He has
promiced to ensure the *right* outcome.


I guess we Arizonans are way ahead of the times. Back to paper
ballots. Even the handicap touch screens produce paper hard-copies
that can be visually examined before turning in.

...Jim Thompson

Using electronics at voting places in insane. It'll break or be
obsolete/unrepairable in a few years, and costs a fortune. Simple
paper ballots and OCR makes a lot more sense.

John

It sure works in Seminole County,Fl.

I'd like to see on-line voting using a secure voter registration number and
return email receipt.

I certainly wouldn't. If you can't get yourself out of bed to go
vote (or register, even) then don't bother. It's *TOO* easy to
vote. Even illegals and Democtats have figured out how to do it.

 

[krw]

My first exposure to democracy was a Vermont town meeting back in the
fifties. Some issues were decided by voice vote, but the ballots for
some questions and each elected position were printed on
different-colored paper, and all ballots were placed in the same box.
When it came time to count, all the ballots were dumped out on a table,
sorted by color, and then the counting was done in public where anyone
who cared could watch.

Oh, good grief. Vermont's "Town Meetings" are about as anti-
democratic as you can get outside an HOA. Most towns are moving
away from them to an "Austrailian Ballot", which looks like any
other.

 

[krw]

Americans don't play football, it's some weird thing where they dress up in
body armour.

That's why they call it FOOTBALL, rather than candy-ass "soccer" or
"commie-rules football". Only rugby comes anywhere close as a
sport.

 

[krw]

Why else would she have been wearing a costume with strategically placed
detachable bits ?

Exactly, and the network got what it deserved.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Ok, so you're volunteering to take all our Democrats?

If Mexico takes all of the Republicans. After all, they keep trying to
Mexicanize the USA.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

That's why they call it FOOTBALL, rather than candy-ass "soccer" or
"commie-rules football". Only rugby comes anywhere close as a
sport.

We don't call that American thing football. Real men don't wear shoulder
pads.

 

[[email protected]]

If Mexico takes all of the Republicans. After all, they keep trying to
Mexicanize the USA.

Astonishingly, all parties are intent on wooing the illegal invaders,
viewing them as new recruits. Even the labor unions--who ostensibly
represent those most affected by unlimited competition from cheaper
labor--are underwriting pro- 'immigration' events.

A rare circumstance where both checks and balances and an adversarial
party system have failed us.

James Arthur

 

[Ken Smith]

A rare circumstance where both checks and balances and an adversarial
party system have failed us.

It has been said that the checks and balances are the checks that get
added to the bank balances.

 

[krw]

We don't call that American thing football. Real men don't wear shoulder
pads.

You think real men wear girlie shorts and take a piss on the field
during the game? How about that head-butt? Fans killing each
other, or players is kinda a nice touch for a day at the games
though.

 

[John Woodgate]

How about that head-butt?

French, you know.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

French, you know.

Yeah, but they stole the idea from billy goats.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Homer J Simpson]

You think real men wear girlie shorts and take a piss on the field
during the game? How about that head-butt? Fans killing each
other, or players is kinda a nice touch for a day at the games
though.

Yes. Takes a real man to wear those shorts. And after the Janet Boob affair
I doubt your players will be getting their dicks out on TV real soon. And if
you've never been in a scrum or a ruck you don't know the meaning of pain.

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

'Rights' have no existence outside of a Human social milieu.
Otherwise any 'Right' can be named, for example, my 'Right' to set fire
to anyone I don't like. Am I born with that inalienable 'Right'? And if
not, why not?

It's sort of like a "gentlemen's agreement". You do, indeed, have the
"right" to set fire to your friend's house, but, in kind, he has the
corresponding "right" to protect his house from your aggression by
whatever means necessary, such as shooting you.

Most people are sane enough to know better than to let situations get
that far out of hand, except, apparently, politicians and their minions.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

I'm sure you know what you mean by that last sentence. But what 'rights'
in an absolute sense, outside of a specific social order, do you think
humans have?

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Duh.

Oh, I guess you're one of the ones that didn't escape during the
big purge.

Sorry.
Rich

 

[Rich the Philosophizer]

The argument below that point was claiming a silly absolute right as a
straw man argument. Someone else could come up with a much better
argument for there being no absolute rights. I did not want people to
think that my disagreement with the argument was merely a
disagreement about the specific strawman rather than the claim that there
are no absolute rights.

No, there is one absolute right.

Free Will.

Which, of course, includes the right to defend your own personal body
against attack.

<rant>
But not to send a killing machine to expunge imaginary boogeymen and
murder the associated innocent women and children who happen to be
"collateral damage".
</rant>

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

There are opinions about whether there are such things as rights and
opinions about what rights there may be. We may be in the same sort of
situation scientists found themselves in many years back. They thought it
likely that there were atoms. They had theories of the universe that
included their existance. However, they could not detect an atom nor tell
what it was made of. Most people would agree that during that time atoms
did really exist, they didn't appear when the first measurement that
proved their existance was done.

Well, in the United States, we have a little document called The
Constitution, which delineates precisely which rights are not to be
violated by the government, period.

Unfortunately, the power-tripping bureaucrats have been finding ways
around those protections for some years.

I wonder what would happen if you took a survey in the street, to
see who agrees with the Bill of Rights, or even knows what it is?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie]

I'd rather give Janet Jackson the right to bare breasts.

Ick! Did you see the close-up of that thing? It was about one of the
ugliest breasts I've ever seen.

If they're going to bare breasts, they should be tastefully-sized
(anything over a mouthful is wasted) rather than udder-sized (why
go out for milk, when you have a cow at home?)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie]

Strangely enough, the sight of bare boobies caused a ruckus in the USA, whilst
dead bodies in the street bother no American at all it seems.

Peculiar priorities for sure ! Save our kids ( and adults too ? ) from bare
flesh but let's encourage pointless killing !

The country was started by Puritans. Those are also the guys who
burned witches, I think.

So we don't come from terribly noble roots. I, myself, find it
tragic that Americans love war and killing and pain and suffering
so much, but censor Love. Apparently they think that letting children
see two people making love will harm their delicate little brains,
but seeing some soldier blow some guy's brains out and stomp on
the remains is just hunky-dory.

Hell of a society we've made for ourselves, here. :-/

Thanks,
Rich