1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

kalifornican of votes Jim March help!!!

Discussion in 'Legal' started by woerm, Feb 19, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. woerm

    woerm Member

    Feb 27, 2004
    Glitter Gulch, LSR

    them kaliforincators have rolled over for diebold black box, again.:cuss:

    what's up here?

    Jim March any ideas?

    any updates can the bs be stopped?


    snip fair use and all that

    McPherson gives conditional OK to Diebold voting machinesAssociated PressSACRAMENTO - California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson gave conditional approval Friday for counties to use two voting machines produced by Diebold Election Systems that he had previously questioned.
    McPherson's office said in December that the Diebold machines failed one of the 10 criteria he established for voting machines because the source coding, or computer language, on their memory cards was not reviewed by independent investigators.
    The coding performs two critical tasks - securing ballot entries and later providing instructions to election officials on how to access and tally the votes.
    Since then, Diebold submitted the machines to further testing by University of California, Berkeley security analysts, who concluded that some of the codes on the memory cards need to be rewritten for long-term use.
    Any immediate worries can be addressed by ensuring there is strict security during voting, the analysts said.
    McPherson said the review persuaded him to authorize Diebold's Optical Scan and Touch-Screen voting systems, as long as counties take additional security precautions, including resetting the programmed code on the machines and keeping a written log of who has control of the memory cards.
    Diebold is still required to make the long-term programming changes then resubmit the machines for independent testing.
    Several California counties had already purchased the machines and some used them in November's statewide special election. The machines were designed to comply with the 2002 Help America Vote Act, which in part was intended to phase out punch card ballots and other old-fashioned systems as well as standardize electronic voting systems.
    In an effort to meet federal requirements that take effect next year, McPherson's office has been engaged for months in evaluating and certifying several different electronic voting machines, including those from Diebold. The North Canton, Ohio-based company is the nation's largest manufacturer of such machines.
  2. swifter

    swifter Member

    Jan 14, 2003
    Southern CA mountains
    :banghead: The state's run by democRats. Of course they don't want honest voting machines. Don't you unnerstand nuthin'?:confused:

    Outa here ASAP:banghead:

  3. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    SF Bay Area
    There's a LOT going on. I just got back from a week in Sacramento working on this stuff. Rather than repeat a massive forum thread here, I need to point y'all to:


    Sidenote: yeah, I find myself allied once AGAIN with Don Perata :eek:. God this is a freaky state.

    For the record: I'm not sure Bruce McPherson is fully in control of the situation. One, I don't think he's watching his allies closely and two, lurking VERY powerfully behind the scenes is Conny McCormack.

    Conny runs the LA County election process and she's a very powerful figure in this state. As one example: when Kevin Shelley (D) was SecState, even before he ran into the various scandals he was allowed to talk to Gov. Arnold by phone ONLY if Conny was in the conversation in conference call. Shelley himself told me that. Conny...well she's baaaad news. When she was running elections in Dallas in the 1980s she was under continuous investigation by either the legislature, the Texas AG's office or both. The USDOJ found her agency in violation of civil rights protections. We still don't have the full list of lawsuits filed but we have details on some and it ain't pretty. In 1983 the Texas legislature tried to pass a bill to make it easier to get rid of controversial elections figures; the "slang name" of the bill was the "get Conny Drake bill" (her maiden name).

    She's VERY bad news and supports the "rights" of the county elections people to run elections as "efficiently" as possible. She's the worst in the state at allowing public oversight and viewing of the vote count process and she's been featured as a promoter of Diebold equipment in their own sales literature.

    This has got her stink ALL over it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page