Monday, July 24, 2006

Today the SD Tribune ran an editorial about the questions being asked by a "small group of internet conspiratorialists".

They don't have their story straight. For one, they never mention the fact that there are numerous, known security issues with Diebold equipment. They make insinuations and assumptions, rather than reporting the facts. I would think an editorial board of a major city newspaper would strive to present some facts in their opinion pieces.

And as for that "other side of the story" comment...they didn't tell OUR side of the story.

I've never heard anyone say "poll workers can't be trusted" but since they bring it up, our system isn't supposed to be based on trusting individuals, but on open government where we can SEE what's going on, and where there are checks and balances.

How can they suggest that our questions undermine voter confidence? For one thing, it seems to me that voter confidence is already shaken. Everyone I talk to is worried about the security of our elections these days. I would think that if there's nothing to hide there's no reason for dis-information and insults. They should be answering questions and providing the information that is requested. I had no reason to distrust the RoV here until I saw their reaction to being questioned by citizens. I've become suspicious, as I've seen how uncooperative the RoV has been.

Try a little open cooperation with your citizens instead of all this hostility and secrecy. We want nothing but secure and transparent elections. That's not asking too much.


Blogger Alicia said...

I'm still shocked that we are privatizing public elections - that there is 'proprietary software' which we are not allowed to look at! WTF? There is nothing more pressing in our so-called 'democracy' that fixing this election crap. Everything else depends on it.

7/25/2006 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger Terry said...

I was shocked about that proprietary software business too. I can't imagine leaving election security in the hands of a private party...especially one that has a financial and political interest in the outcome of elections as Diebold does.

It's a mess, but as was said a couple posts down, at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and say "stop!" I don't want our democratic processes sold to the lowest bidder!

I remember when the government was first putting up informational websites for the public and the Social Security Administration thought that was a great idea. It was a great idea, but they didn't think out the security aspects and had to take the site down to completely reconfigure it.

Sometimes I think they just go, "ooooh...shiny new toys!" and whip this stuff out before it's ready to be deployed.

7/25/2006 12:19:00 PM  
Blogger nunya said...

I spent the whole effing day on this entry because I smelled a rat. I don't normally bother with 60 links. Go see how the other half lives: John Diebold

I live in the 50th, & I grew up here. You know there is a lot of nasty underhanded stuff that goes on in this city.

7/26/2006 03:18:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home