Recent Political Change May Positively Affect GA

Matt Whiting wrote:

So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called here)?
means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?

What is the purpose of that?

Expressing your opinion. That's pretty much the point of the
whole voting thing.

--Sylvain

I worked the polls all day on Nov 7. I've got to tell you
that a very large number of the voters [even in an up scale
educated area] are idiots. As an example, after explaining
a woman that there were four pages on the ballot and the
VOTE button would be in-active until she had looked at and

Snip of incredible story

Here in Iowa, for the first time, we had the choice of voting either
electronically, using a bone-simple touch screen, or on paper.

Amazingly (to me) I was the ONLY person in line to choose to vote
electronically, while everyone else in this VERY left-wing area (the
last Republican elected here was in 1957) chose paper -- no doubt
because of all the liberal media gibberish about how the Republicans
were going to "steal" the election by using Diebold's computers...

What was really hilarious (to me) was that the people who voted on
paper were then directed (as always) to feed their ballot into a (you
guessed it!) computer tabulator! I just about died laughing.

My night manager, after being told this story, went to vote in a
different precinct. He had to *ask* to vote electronically, and their
response was "Why would you want to do *that*?" They were actively
discouraging the use of the new system.

And, as usual, no attempt was made to verify that I was, indeed, the
voter I said I was. Once again, I could easily have voted multiple
times, in multiple precincts. Yet we're spending thousands
(millions?) of dollars "tightening up the system" by investing in
computerized voting machines.

It is to weep.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

We got into this war with attacks on NY and DC. What is your evidence that
Bush was responsible for those attacks?

With all due respect, please explicitly express (your version of) the
facts that lead you to believe that there is a link between the
attacks you mention and the botched vendetta Bush is executing in
Iraq.

Now THIS should be fun!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jim Macklin" writes:

The whole Muslim terrorist world has declared war on the
USA.

There are only a handful of Muslim terrorists in the world, and they
don't represent a sovereign state, so they cannot formally declare
war.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Yes, that is exactly what the woman did, but she wanted to
vote for somebody. I suspect she was a dimocrat.



"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin"
wrote:
|
| Then she reviewed her blank ballot
| and voted it again. Then she "read" the last question
and
| pressed the CONFIRM button.
|
|
| So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called
here)?
| means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?
|
| #m
| --
| I Am Not A Terrorist http://itsnotallbad.com/

Clear to me. He's saying that Normandy France did not
attack England or the USA, so how could we kill all those
innocent French citizens while claiming to be fighting the
war on socialism, aka NAZI.



"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
|
|
| Don Tabor wrote:
|
|
| So, our attack on D-Day was unjustified because Normandy
did not bomb
| Pearl Harbor?
|
|
| Any chance this is supposed to make any sense?
|

"DonSideB" wrote in message
...
When fascism attacked us in WW2, we went to Normandy before going
after the Japanese directly because that is where the winning strategy
led us.

Uh, no. Japan attacked the US. The following day, the US declared war on
Japan. Three days later, Japan's ally Germany declared war on the US.

In contrast, Iraq's conduct in the aftermath of 9/11 included neither a
declaration of war on the US, nor an invasion of the US. The strongest link
you appear to be making between Iraq and the 9/11 attackers is that they
share the same religion. They were in fact enemies of one another, not
allies; Saddam Hussein was precisely the sort of secular, US-supported Arab
ruler that al Qaeda despised.

Their ultimate goal is to unify Islam under a restored Caliphate and
proceed on their god given mission of world domination.

Uh, can you attribute that goal to *Iraq*? On what evidence? "Protocols of
the Elders of Islam"?

Likewise, Falujah should have been flattened.

It is trivial to rationalize whatever mass atrocities you'd like to commit
if you allow yourself to simply proclaim, without evidence, what your
targets' motives and plans are.

--Gary

Mxsmanic wrote:
"Jim Macklin" writes:


The whole Muslim terrorist world has declared war on the
USA.


There are only a handful of Muslim terrorists in the world, and they
don't represent a sovereign state, so they cannot formally declare
war.




Your ability to completely and utterly miss a point is astounding.

NONE of the ABOVE

The machine requires that you at least view each page of the
ballot, but you are never obligated to vote for anyone. The
machine won't let you vote for more candidates for any
office than are allowed.

The machines we use in Sedgwick County, Kansas are
iVotronic.
A demo
http://elections.co.lake.fl.us/ivotr...oting_demo.asp

http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/elections/index.html


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
| Martin Hotze wrote:
|
| "Jim Macklin"
wrote:
|
|
| Then she reviewed her blank ballot
| and voted it again. Then she "read" the last question
and
| pressed the CONFIRM button.
|
|
|
| So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called
here)?
| means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?
|
| What is the purpose of that?
|
| Matt

Sylvain wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:


So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called here)?
means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?

What is the purpose of that?


Expressing your opinion. That's pretty much the point of the
whole voting thing.

You can express the "do nothing" opinion by staying home. I can see
this if they are just voting to maintain their registration to vote in
future elections. However, as a political statement, it is pretty much
a waste of time. Not voting at all sends nearly the same message.


Matt