Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 10   Supported 6   Valuable 5   View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (14 comments)

To The American Media: Time To Face The Reality Of Election Rigging

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (4 fans)   -- Page 1 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com

                                                                                                  April 8, 2011

To every Journalist and Media Reformer assembled here in Boston:

How does the Big Lie flourish and prosper?   By being criminal beyond belief.     By operating in safety behind a towering "never happen here" wall of denial.   By a foolish assumption of immunity. By being too big a story to be a story within the bounds of journalistic decorum.  

The gruesome truth is that American elections can be rigged and are being rigged because the American media treats election rigging as something that--all evidence notwithstanding--could never happen here.   Period, end of story, move on.

And we are moving on. To an unrecognizable America.   An America in which, when even obscene amounts of cash can't buy enough votes, those votes can be manufactured (added, switched, deleted wholesale) in the darkness of cyberspace.   It's too easy.   And it's happening.   A Big Lie is consuming America.

We ask each of you in turn--reporter, editor, commentator, reformer--are you willing to sit back and let this happen on your watch?   Can you take 15 minutes to stand before this picture, taking it in, and then ask yourself, if we have been persuasive, what you are going to do?

Let's begin with the voting and counting process itself.   It is now virtually everywhere in America a computerized process and those computers are under the proprietary control of a handful of corporations. Would you cheerfully hand your vote to a little man behind a curtain and wait for him to come back out and tell you who won?   What if he were wearing a "Peace" button, or a "Palin-For-President" button, or some other partisan identifier?  

How is what we are doing as we vote in America any different?  

Study after study--from Princeton, to Johns Hopkins, to NYU's Brennan Center, to the California Secretary of State's office, to the GAO itself ( see http://tinyurl.com/3hz7xj2 ) --conclude that this counting process is obscenely vulnerable to insider manipulation and outsider hacking.   So have many studies examining computerized voting abroad--which is why countries such as Germany, Ireland, and Holland have begun turning back to human counted ballots. There is consensus verging on unanimity among the experts.

How comfortable are you with that? Can you go about your business with democracy hanging from such a thin thread, with America that exposed to a silent coup?

Perhaps we should leave it there.   Because it makes sense, does it not, that we can't continue to accept the risk of systemic sabotage inherent in such a counting process.   Not when a return to public hand counting of the federal and statewide contests would restore transparency and remove the risk of wholesale manipulation, at a civic burden far smaller than jury duty.   Surely we can take a few hours every two years to count some votes for our democracy.

It is a slam dunk. Or should be.   Except . . . , as with global warming and other incipient disasters, mere vulnerability to something that might happen proves to be a poor motivator of decisive and courageous action.   We reform in the wake of calamity, not in anticipation of it.

And here we come to the crux of our dilemma and to our Catch-22.   Because as long as we speak or write about vulnerabilities and hypotheticals, there seems to be at least the hope of dialogue.   Heck, some among the media--Lou Dobbs comes to mind--have raised the very issue in the run-up to elections: "Will Your Vote Be Counted? Tune in tomorrow."   But that permissible question proves transient, and it evaporates as the votes are counted on Election Night and following.   Any attempt to offer evidence of actual manipulation, actual theft?   Not welcome.   Forget it.   Omerta.  

How come? Is it because it remains beyond the pale of belief that such easy vulnerability is actually being exploited?   This even in the age of Barry Bonds, A-Rod, Lance Armstrong, Alberto Contador, Bernie Madoff, Goldman Sachs, and the whole parade of high-stakes cheating scandals, not to mention the mounting wave of cybercrime, to which even sophisticated financial institutions and the Pentagon have proven vulnerable?   Elections are the highest stakes game of all.  

But America is the Beacon of Democracy dammit--it could never happen here.   So Americans are instructed--by you, the media--to accept on pure faith that those in control of, or having access to, our privatized and concealed voting systems will devoutly serve the public trust rather than any conflicting private or partisan agenda.   Any evidence that this faith is misplaced is ignored.   Too dangerous.   Too destablizing.   Too disturbing.   Too un-American.   And yet, without this evidence, everything is just hypothetical, vulnerable, possible, and there is no imperative for change.

So we now bring forth a synopsis of the "evidence," knowing well that it has been as indigestible as shards of glass.   We know of no easy way to make it go down.   We know only that we continue to ignore it at our great peril.   The grave of a democracy is a mass grave--there's room for all of us.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

www.ElectionDefenseAlliance.org

Jonathan Simon is a graduate of Harvard College and New York University School of Law, and a member of the Bar of Massachusetts. As a result of his prior experience as a political survey research analyst for Peter D. Hart Research Associates in (more...)
 

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

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
14 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

An Open Letter To The Media by Jonathan Simon on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 8:06:11 AM
Asleep, NOT by bogi666 on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 10:22:39 AM
If true by Don Smith on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 10:49:47 AM
Political monoculture by John Smith on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:01:51 PM
Political monoculture by John Smith on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:03:35 PM
Complicit Congress & Justice Department in Election Fraud? by Hubert Steed on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 1:53:54 PM
Just one of the many reasons by maheanuu on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:37:06 PM
Elections Are Not For Fairness by Dennis Kaiser on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 3:36:23 PM
bad link by George Ripley on Monday, Apr 11, 2011 at 1:40:46 AM
Electronic voting is a con game by Bill Hare on Saturday, Apr 9, 2011 at 6:24:15 PM
Denial by intotheabyss on Sunday, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:30:30 AM
We Contested My Election in 2006... by John Russell on Monday, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:11:07 PM
We need to get this right by Andy Fields on Tuesday, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:34:22 AM
Detractors by Jonathan Simon on Tuesday, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:51:36 AM