Skip to comments.
DIEBOLD-FACED LIES (And Florida 2000 lies, and Memogate lies...all by Paul Krugman)
The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid ^
| December 3, 2003
| Donald L. Luskin
Posted on 12/03/2003 9:24:17 AM PST by Timesink
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator
To: Timesink; Lazamataz; remember; holdonnow; Perlstein; jmstein7; LS; William McKinley; RJayneJ; ...
![](http://bulldogbulletin.lhhosting.com/images/USA-09.gif)
What Krugman is doing is completely irresponsible in that he is prepping the battlefield with his columns such that every election can be contested. that would have an adverse impact on how Americans view a Democratic Republic.
If Krugman had limited his screed to simply demanding that electronic voting have better audit controls, then he'd be doing America a service.
But he didn't, and he isn't doing us a service, either.
What he's doing is sowing dissent for the sake of dissent.
Krugman knows full well that if all Bush did in 2004 was carry his same states that he won in 2000, that due to the electoral revision per the 2000 census Bush would win in 2004 by 18 electoral votes rather than just by the 4 he won by in 2000.
Krugman also knows that due to the redistricting in Texas, that Democrats are set to lose more seats in the House in 2004, as well as that the Dems are in position to lose four or more Senate seats in 2004.
So what he's doing is providing an excuse to the leftist diehards to be enraged rather than discouraged by their inevitable rout that they are about to suffer in 2004. They can point to Krugman's NY Times columns and claim that the 2004 election was "rigged."
That's pretty sad. The hardcore leftists are already planning on doing damage control for their inevitable 2004 losses, and once-respectable papers such as the Times are carrying their water by running such irresponsible columns.
Ask for better audit controls and paper trails from the electronic machines; that's fine. Just don't wildly claim that the reason for your forthcoming losses are due to alleged fraud rather than to a lack of mature political gamesmanship (read: new ideas, policies, positive proposals, etc.).
22
posted on
12/03/2003 11:52:30 AM PST
by
Southack
(Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: Big Midget
You are right, even though Krugman is biased against the GOP doesn't mean that voting machines which cannot give a verified audit trail is a good thing. These machines are being sold to states, and the party in charge of each state is the party that could be suspect.
I live in Illinois, so you know which party may be doing the funny business with these machines over here.
To: Celtjew Libertarian
"...touch screen voting will make it too easy for Democrats to rig the voting even more than they usually do."
At least the dead that vote from the grave for RAT candidates have to send a medium to fill out their ballots. With little electronic blips, well, who'd ever be cynical enough to believe something like computers could ever be illicitly manipulated?
24
posted on
12/03/2003 12:08:39 PM PST
by
WorkingClassFilth
(DEFUND NPR & PBS - THE AMERICAN PRAVDA)
To: .cnI redruM
But wasn't it the Dems who vehemently insisted that anything but touch screen voting was inadequate, and thus racist?
25
posted on
12/03/2003 12:13:25 PM PST
by
mrustow
(no tag)
To: mrustow
You're expecting consistency or something. Sorry, the author was Krazy Krugman. TO him, consistency is the hobgoblin of academic big think.
26
posted on
12/03/2003 12:15:21 PM PST
by
.cnI redruM
(At the core, beneath a thin veneer of socialization, we are still salacious monkeys.)
To: Celtjew Libertarian
I agree. We need some paper trail with this computer voting for verification. The Democrats have been known to steal a few elections in their time.
To: Re-electNobody
I agree with the need for an audit trail. Computer hackers can work seeming miracles.
Wasn't it President Reagan who said "Trust, but Verify"? The ability to verify is necessary, imo.
Comment #29 Removed by Moderator
To: .cnI redruM
You're expecting consistency or something. Sorry, the author was Krazy Krugman. TO him, consistency is the hobgoblin of academic big think.As with Krugman, so with the Times' readers -- his columns are consistently in the top 5 or 10 of e-mailed Times articles. Heck, this one was #1 or #2 the other night.
30
posted on
12/03/2003 2:41:24 PM PST
by
mrustow
(no tag)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-30 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson