![]() |
By Jerry Lobdill (about the author) Page 2 of 2 page(s)
Now we have a new effort, this time in the Senate instead of the House, announced through Senator Diane Feinstein's office on May 22, 2008. If you read the Feinstein article (http://tinyurl.com/5ol7la)you will see that this effort is doomed from the start to produce, once again, a bill that should die a-borning. The charge of the committee is to write a bill that will require a computer-printed version of a voter's ballot choices that have been entered into a DRE paperless electronic voting machine. Why the hell do arrogant legislators keep bringing up ideas like this that they should know by now are flawed and not the best solution proposed by the scientists who have studied this for years? Is it arrogance, or is it a deliberate nod to an industry whose performance can only be interpreted as a criminal activity designed to enable and facilitate wholesale election fraud? To participate in this charade is to dignify it as legitimate. We should instead be rising up in indignation and demanding an end to the fraud.
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
| 13 comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |