have you tried our hate-filled trolls?

I must say that I was a bit surprised by the number of angry and defensive comments I’ve been getting these past few days for posting links to sites that suggest there may have been widespread voter fraud in last week’s election. I was, perhaps naively, under the impression that both Republicans and Democrats alike would be against vote tampering. Apparently, that’s not the case though, at least in the minds of the Bush-supporters that troll this site. It doesn’t matter that I was expressing my views about electronic voting long before the results of this election were known. And, it doesn’t matter that I’d be saying the same thing today even if Kerry had come out on top. No, that’s all too “nuanced.” It’s much easier to just say, “He’s a sore loser.” Well, so be it.

Now, here, because I don’t give a fuck what you think, are four more links on the subject.

The first will take you to a video of white Republicans up to no good in an African American precinct in Ohio on election day. The second will lead you to a transcript of an an interview with Bev Harris, the grandma turned activist behind BlackBoxVoting.org. The third will send you to an article about a precinct in Ohio that seems to have many more votes for Bush than it had voters. And, the fourth will attempt to bring it all together

Like I’ve said before, even if there was fraud, I doubt that it would have been enough to change the results of this election. So, this isn’t, at least to me, about keeping Bush from serving his elected term. This is about looking at the weaknesses in the system and then initiating a serious discourse concerning voting reform in this country. Elections, I think most of us would agree, should be standardized across the country. And, electronic voting machines, if we decide to use them, should print paper receipts that could, if necessary, be audited. Furthermore, the administration of elections should be taken out of partisan hands, as should the production and service of the machines themselves. I don’t think any of these suggestions is radical, and I can’t imagine that anyone who professes to love and value democracy could protest. This country of ours is based on the sanctity of the vote, and we need to do whatever is necessary to preserve that. Without it, the Constitution is a meaningless piece of rubbish…

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.


  1. Sean
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 6:39 am | Permalink


    Just to clear things up. I agree with you 100% that all votes should be counted. I also agree that the process should be standardized and if using electronic machines (my preference) then it should produce a reciept. I also feel that we should not call states for one candidate until all votes are counted and certified. Yes that might hurt the ratings for all these news networks wanting to cover the story. But why not wait 10 more days to make sure you got it right. And while we are at it. Stop reporting the exit poll information while people are still voting.

    See there is some common ground Maynard.

  2. Ken
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    I hear that hate-filled trolls are at peak season and are brimming with flavor!

  3. Sean
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    Interesting link. You will come to your own conclusions I am sure.


  4. Posted November 9, 2004 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    Yet another unbiased site. With a hilarious quote on their links page:

    “The Media Research Center is essential because it provides logic, truth, research and persuasion. The MRC is the first warning signal of a political scam.”
    ~ Michael Medved, Talk Show Host

    Can you hear pings in an echo chamber?

    Can two different echochambers create silence?


  5. Posted November 9, 2004 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    Yes. They are chocolatie, with a hint of crisped rice. But the aftertaste is like licking the dirtiest toilet in Hell, so it’s a bit of give and take.

    I haven’t read the comments yet, but it seems to me that by shining a light on the possibility of voting fraud you might be casting a bit of reflected light on the little part in their souls that whisper to them, “Psst. Your candidate just MIGHT have cheated his way to the throne… twice… perhaps.” and they would rather say, with fingers in ears, “LALALALA! Sour grapes Mark! LALALALA! Nothing is wrong! LALALALALA! Ignore the man behind the curtain!”.

    Easier to say you are a whiner and sore loser I guess than face the fact that the system is seriously, and possibly fatally flawed, as long as there are people not willing to point out the game might be rigged and people in power that are willing to rig the game.

    We DO need standard voting procedures, there MUST be a way to tabulate electronic voting in case the electrons get scrambled or lost, the people responsible for the gathering and handling of the votes and the manufacturing and programming of the machines HAVE TO be trustworthy.

    And in this election that wasn’t the case.

    Please forgive the ramble. I’m tired.

  6. Tony Buttons
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    Bozell is hardly a trusted, independent, non-partisan voice for truth. Again I say to you, “Do your homework, Sean.” If you’re trying to persuade us, use facts. Don’t give us a link to a page that suggests that the bias AGAINST the Swift Boat Vets was one of the biggest unreported stories of the year. That’s just pathetic.

    Here is a quote from an article at MediaTransparency.org

    “…it is Bozell’s Media Research Center that stands out as the right’s preeminent media cop. Bozell is a Republican operative with credentials earned in George Bush’s 1988 presidential campaign. The nephew of William F. Buckley, he headed the Conservative Victory Committee that year. He is also connected to the Political Club for Growth, a network of conservative and libertarian activists and groups sympathetic to cutting taxes and shrinking government.

    What Bozell and others perceive as liberal bias often means presenting information about government help for the poor, the homeless, the weak, and so on — information that conflicts with the objectives of the right. Tim Graham explained that ABC was once “the worst” in its approach to stories. He said that the Center had seen on ABC what he called “a repeated stream of stories on victims of spending cuts. … We don’t see victims of tax hikes…”

  7. Sean
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    Not trying to persuade anyone in this room. Trust me. Am humored by the responses thats all. Thought I would just paste that in there and see the sparks fly.

    Like a car wreck on this page. I know I should not look but cannot help it.

  8. Posted November 9, 2004 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    So Sean, if your objective here is not to facilitate productive discourse or actually engage in real issues then it would appear that you’re merely reveling in your newfound role as the one dissenting (or instigating) voice on Mark’s site. It seems to me like “paste that in there and see the sparks fly” isn’t any different from what would expect from any of the media windbags like Coulter, Limbaugh, etc. Are we to believe that no consensus can be reached or rather that substance is irrelevant in the presence of hype and rabble-rousing?

  9. mark
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

    Cory, my sense is that he really does believe what he says when he says it. But then, every time he’s proven wrong, he retreats to the safety of the, “oh I was just trying to start some shit,” position. I find it more sad than annoying really.

  10. Posted November 9, 2004 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

    A copycat might say “Let’s troll and firebomb Sean’s sites”, but he is anonymous and lists none? Oh well…

    Alternate: we could all go to the Detroit meetup of

    “Patriotic Americans Boycotting Anti-American Hollywood” http://pabaah.com/

    Oh, wait, there’s no one interested (might be a black thing):


    Here’s a nice sampling of their comments (they’d fit in so we’ll at the Majestic Cafe’):

    “Re: Dubya In 2008–Repeal The 22nd Amendment (Score: 1) by HotCarl on Monday, November 08 @ 15:45:33 CST
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    Oh my gosh, it would be awesome if dubya could be president for a third term, I’d vote for him as long as he’d be willing to lead us. Those towelheads love the fact that every four years our government has the chance to get taken over by liberals. The 22nd amendment is UNAMERICAN.”

  11. chris
    Posted November 9, 2004 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

    Hell-o dears,

    please checkk out http://www.fuckthesouth.com for some genius ranting. “we paid for your bridges, bitch” is but one of the many jewels.

    Love, Chris

    Oh my son asked me if peace meant dead. I asked where he got that association and he said, “as in Rest in Peace”. Maybe he’s on to something. Mass suicides anyone? No, I want to be here for the Fall, its a comin’ my friends.

  12. Posted November 9, 2004 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

    Don’t forget “Expel the North”:

    As a transplanted Southerner, I feel it’s my duty to remind people that the South’s Republican leanings didn’t start until the Northerners started moving down there en masse.

  13. Posted November 9, 2004 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

    Sean Hannity flosses the butt-hair of America, dislodging chunks of decontextualized matter that bear little resemblance to the undigested truth. Thanks for dropping by, so to speak, and stay away from Rush Limbaugh’s ass.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Jeff Clark