[Timesink]

Schadenfreude

This is the New York Times Krugmanfreude Ping List. Freepmail me to be added or dropped.

Please, somebody teach me how to think!

---

This is the Mainstream Media Shenanigans ping list. Please freepmail me to be added or dropped.
Please note this is a medium- to high-volume list.
Please feel free to ping me if you come across a thread you would think worthy of this ping list. I can't catch them all!

[finnman69]

Wow, the Bush hating "economist" is now an expert on voting machines.

[txzman]

Krugman is a shadow of a human being, so caught up in his hate for Bush that I am quite sure he actually sees Republican monsters under his bed at night.

Me thinks his parents neglected to change his diaper enough.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

I hate to agree with Krugman, but I don't like touch screen voting either, as much as I like computers. I want there to be a physical ballot that I know has gone in the ballot box, because I placed it there.

When I use a computer for E-mail or FreeRepublic, I can go back and see what I've written. When I buy something on-line, there is a receipt that I can print out and check on. Unless there is some physical printout of my ballot, I don't have that confirmation.

Funny thing is, my gut reaction is that touch screen voting will make it too easy for Democrats to rig the voting even more than they usually do.

[woerm]

Hi all,

memo from email systems admin of waaaay tooo much experience

do not put anything in an email you don't want on the front page of the *Times*

*= any paper you wouldn't want to be quoted by...

email, especially internet email is just designed to deliver email not to provide any inherent security to the document.

inhouse stuff like GroupWise or Lotus is some what better than M$loth stuff, but always remember that email can get forwarded to places you have no control over.

</sarcasam
confidential/sensitive data on an unsecure server?

not a resume enhancment

r

[Always Right]

Krugman starts the column by making it seem as though O'Dell has confessed to using Diebold machines to rig elections. Quoting from a letter from O'Dell concerning a Bush fundraiser: "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

You have to understand, when Democrats say they are gonna 'deliver' votes they really mean lie, steal, and cheat. Democrats just assume that everyone is as much of a low-life as they are.

[steve-b]

Notwithstanding the fact that Krugman has three working neurons on a good day, Diebold's system (like any "electronic voting" system that does not generate a voter-verified paper record that takes priority over the electronic record if the two disagree) stinks to high heaven.

There is simply no excuse for tolerating the absence of this elementary security feature.

[.cnI redruM]

I know this one will set off a flame war, but.....

Krazy Krugman has a valid point. Not even just the one on top of his head. Voting machines can be hacked and used to fix elections. I don't trust their reliability.

[Southack]

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.).