Thursday, December 18, 2008
Humboldt Envy?
Last week I posted a letter to the editor I had published in the Eureka Times-Standard (archive). It was written quickly on the morning of December 5, in the midst of the breaking news that the Humboldt County Election Transparency Project had revealed a failure in Diebold's GEMS central tabulator causing the County's certified election results from November to be proven inaccurate.
I sent the same letter to the North Coast Journal since there was also a breaking story on their website about it, even though it hadn't yet appeared in their weekly print edition. When that came out last Wednesday, I wasn't too surprised the letter wasn't published or that editor Hank Sims had editorialized about the story. So I used his column as the basis for yet another letter, which the Journal has published in this week's paper:North Coast Journal
It is tough to be timely in a weekly paper when commenting on a fluid situation. See my exclusive report from Wednesday morning about Humboldt County Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich announcing her intention to dump Diebold scanners in favor of similar secret corporate vote "counting" machines from Hart InterCivic. It is a major advance of the narrative above and has been republished at OpEdNews and Scoop.
Mail Box
12/18/08
Dear Editor:
Hank Sims now says Humboldt's official method of counting votes is an outrage ("Town Dandy," Dec. 11) and the Diebold/Premier folks "should be shunned. Maybe indicted." He may be late to the party, but the top hat and tails are always welcome.
Yes, Humboldt has joined Florida, Ohio, and towns and counties across the land who have experienced the failures of electronic voting. Our certification of inaccurate results has made national news and broken down some of the local wall of denial.
A December 7 editorial in The Times-Standard said local opponents of Diebold "were right to make noise, and right to complain about a company that has been less than responsible." Humboldt Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich told Wired.com in a Dec. 8 article, "this has sort of put a cloud over any confidence that I had in the Premier equipment that's been in this department since 1995."
Has Humboldt finally reached a tipping point? Are we ready to consider alternatives to Diebold? If so, a careful evaluation of the possibilities and input from a well informed community would be both appropriate and desirable.
I'd like to see more consistency in Sims' election integrity advocacy. And bottom line, I hope he'll push for a thorough examination of our options. A lot of work has already been done to facilitate evaluating hand-counting paper ballots, though Election Transparency Project volunteers may have other preferences and ideas to contribute to what could become the most envied process and dialog in the country.
Dave Berman, Eureka
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/12/humboldt-envy.html
Labels: Carolyn Crnich, Diebold, Eureka T-S, Hank Sims, Hart Intercivic, Humboldt County, Letter to the editor, North Coast Journal
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Humboldt At The Tipping Point: Who Dares Defend Diebold?
Here in Humboldt County, CA a local story of national interest broke last Thursday on the websites of the Eureka Times-Standard (archive) and North Coast Journal. The next morning I wrote a letter to the editor that appeared in today's T-S (archive). I'll let this serve as a summary then provide links to much of what's been published already and add some further reasons for optimism at the bottom.Any defenders?
So here's a summary of links from the past several days, then I've got a few more observations.
Letters to the editor
Posted: 12/10/2008 01:15:38 AM PST
First I'd like to congratulate Kevin Collins, Tom Pinto, Mitch Trachtenberg, Parke Bostrom and all the volunteers of the Election Transparency Project.
Their work revealed a discrepancy caused by Humboldt's electronic voting equipment last month.
Over the last few years I've made many different arguments for getting rid of the Diebold (now Premier) equipment used to count votes in Humboldt County. Somehow it wasn't enough that they “count” in secret, can be easily manipulated without detection, and report results impossible in a legitimate election.
Somehow local decision makers weren't deterred from doing business with a company that admitted to illegally installing uncertified software here and elsewhere; that was sued in class action suits filed by company shareholders; and whose then -- CEO said he was “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes” to Bush in 2004.
Now we learn that Humboldt has finally experienced what is euphemistically called a “glitch.” In reality it was a bug in Diebold's central tabulation program, GEMS. This caused the results of November's election, already certified as accurate by Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich, to be proven inaccurate.
Worse still, Diebold knew about the bug at least four years ago and never fixed it. Other counties were made aware of the problem and told how to work around it. Crnich says she never knew, and I believe her.
This raises many questions, most important among them: Who dares defend the continued use of these machines and the county's relationship with Diebold/Premier?
Dave Berman
Eureka
T-S, 12/5/08: Software glitch yields inaccurate election results (archive)
T-S, 12/7/08 Local elections office commended (archive)
T-S Editorial, 12/7/08 - A glitch that should never have been (archive)
Wired - two Kim Zetter articles from 12/8/08:
Serious Error in Diebold Voting Software Caused Lost Ballots in California County
Unique Transparency Program Uncovers Problems with Voting Software
Election Transparency Project volunteers:
Parke Bostrom - http://hum.dreamhosters.com/etp/news/20081204.html (main site)
Mitch Trachtenberg - http://www.mitchtrachtenberg.com/ourvotes.html (main site)
Tom Pinto - http://humtp.com/
John Gideon & Brad Friedman at BradBlog.com, 12/8/08 - 'Humboldt Transparency Project' Reveals Diebold, U.S. Federal E-Voting Scam
The BradBlog piece includes this link to an .mp3 of Crnich with Brad on the Peter B. Collins show on the afternoon of 12/5/08.
* * *The fact that Diebold/Premier did not take the action to recall the systems, actually puts them into a situation where they may very well have violated federal law. The Help America Vote Act of 2002 Title III Section 301(a)(5) mandates an acceptable error rate for voting systems in use in federal elections. That error rate, not counting any error caused by an action of the voter, cannot exceed 0.00001%.
Parke Bostrom's post above describes how "deck zero" became the batch of ballots that were handled properly by the elections department, and yet vanished from the final certified total. He comments further that the audit log for the Diebold GEMS central tabulation software matched the wrongly decreased total:
However, in the case of the Humboldt County vote count, the error rate was 0.31%.
We have asked both the Secretary of State of California and the EAC if they plan to take action by asking the US Attorney Office to investigate this seemingly clear violation of federal law. Neither the CA SoS, nor the EAC has yet replied to our queries on that matter.This means the audit log is not truly a "log" in the classical computer program sense, but is rather a "re-imagining" of what GEMS would like the audit log to be, based on whatever information GEMS happens to remember at the end of the vote counting process.
This demonstrates the system will cover its tracks when reporting an inaccurate result, destroying assurances of built-in memory redundancies and making a mockery of logic and accuracy testing. Not just here, everywhere. Frankly this is just another example of something we've known a long time.
Crnich herself has been very interesting through all of this. In the "Serious Error..." article above, Zetter reports:Crnich told Threat Level the issue has made her question her confidence in the voting system because, even though the company provided officials with a workaround, the problem indicated a fundamental flaw in the company's programming. She said she'd heard a lot of stories from other election officials about problems with voting machines, but never thought they applied to California.
Crnich losing confidence of course should be music to our ears. She also said a great thing in the interview with Peter B., explaining why she's been willing to work with citizen volunteers. As Humboldt County Clerk/Recorder and Registrar of Voters, Crnich is an elected official and I'm glad she acknowledged a responsibility to listen to constituents.
"I've always sort of listened to those anecdotal incidents with a jaundiced ear because California has some very stringent requirements of election systems that are in use here as well as some very strict security procedures and I didn't think those things affected us here," she said. "But this has sort of put a cloud over any confidence that I had in the Premier equipment that's been in this department since 1995."
In all, the media coverage above practically lionizes Crnich, which I think goes too far. Consider this analogy. Someone builds a fire in the middle of their bedroom and burns down the house. Would this person be praised for the wisdom of having an insurance policy? Using secret corporate vote counting computers, whether by Diebold or any other vendor, is playing with fire.
I've been unable to reach Crnich by phone in the past two days, repeatedly getting voice mail that could not accept more messages.
Also today, The North Coast Journal came out with Hank Sims' "Town Dandy" column called Deck Zero. Sims writes in reference to the known failure of the GEMS central tabulation software:The fact that Diebold/Premier let it stand for over four years, potentially undermining the first principle of American democracy, is an absolute outrage. These people should be shunned. Maybe indicted.
Throw in a little validation from the T-S editorial board...:They were loud, and they were strident in proclaiming that they didn't trust election technologies as much as they trust the ability of actual human beings to count votes.
...and it is starting to sound like we may be at a tipping point here. You might expect me to be frothing about hand-counting paper ballots right about now. You'd be wrong. Thinking as an organizer, I would hope now to establish three things that would be widely agreeable throughout the community:
The recent discovery, thanks to the Humboldt County Election Transparency Project, of a discrepancy in election results due to flawed software reveals that these activists were right to make noise, and right to complain about a company that has been less than responsible in dealing with the problem.
That said, if this is the nature of the opportunity now, I will re-offer to the community the materials I've developed to evaluate hand counting, most notably the forecast tool (spreadsheet) for estimating time, cost and labor needs for hand-counting in the precinct on election night. Back in the summer of 2007, when I first made this public, Sims noted: "Initial twiddling with the numbers suggests that it wouldn't be all that time-consuming or costly -- and wouldn't you rather wait a few days and spend a little more for a trustworthy count?"
I'd like to see more consistency in Sims' election integrity advocacy. And bottom line, I hope he'll push for a thorough examination of Diebold alternatives, as I'm sure Transparency Project volunteers will have other preferences and ideas to contribute to what could become the most envied process and dialog in the country.
This is all another way of saying "what would be better" is an inclusive and engaging community dialog aimed at literally defining "better" than Diebold.
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/12/humboldt-at-tipping-point-who-dares.html
Labels: Brad Friedman, Carolyn Crnich, Diebold, Eureka T-S, Hank Sims, Humboldt Transparency Project, Kevin Collins, Mitch Trachtenberg, North Coast Journal, Parke Bostrom, spreadsheet tool, Tom Pinto
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Peter B. Collins, Dave Berman to Discuss Unprovable Federal Election Results - 10/23 5pm PT
Listen live through PeterBCollins.com Thursday at 5pm PT as I'll be on this great talk radio show to discuss whether the accuracy of federal election results can be proven.
For a long time I have argued federal election results are inherently inconclusive, unknowable and unprovable - based entirely on the conditions under which "elections" are conducted. There is simply no basis for confidence in the reported results, that is, no reason to believe them.
As I hinted last Friday, when I wrote about the Nation's John Nichols coming around to describing the 2000 and 2004 elections as "inconclusive," during tomorrow's interview we will begin to hear a louder chorus taking up this message and calling out the media.
Why should we be expected to believe reported election results that media have not and can not independently verify, which can't even be proven, and which come from only one source - the very government whose grip on power is at stake?
In fact, for as long as I've written the We Do Not Consent blog there have been others making this point. In the back of my book, We Do Not Consent, (free .pdf), there are testimonials that have permanently appeared in the sidebar of the blog as follows:"This is an important collection of essays with a strong unitary theme: if you can't prove that you were elected, we can't take you seriously as elected officials. Simple, logical, comprehensive. 'Management' (aka, the 'powers that be') needs to get the message. 'The machines' are not legitimizers, they're an artful dodge and a path to deception. We've had enough...and we most certainly DO NOT consent."
Over the years, these points have been made in countless ways. Tomorrow we will unveil perhaps the most impactful expression yet. In the meantime, here's another that I submitted last week as a letter to the editor of the North Coast Journal. I'm posting it now because their new issue came out today without it.
— Michael Collins covers the election fraud beat for "Scoop" Independent Media
and...
"If in the future we have vital elections, the "no basis for confidence" formulation that GuvWurld is popularizing will have been a historically important development. This is true because by implicitly insisting on verification and checks and balances instead of faith or trust in elections officials or machines as a basis for legitimacy, it encourages healthy transparent elections. It's also rare that a political formulation approaches scientific certainty, but this formulation is backed up by scientific principles that teach that if you can't repeat something (such as an election) and verify it by independent means, it doesn't exist within the realm of what science will accept as established or proven truth."
— Paul Lehto, Juris DoctorDear Editor:
Thank you for the even-handed run down of state and local ballot issues (Oct. 9). Perhaps you could also devote a little space to both sides of a national question: are federal election results provable?
One side says: we have secret corporate vote counting computers in more than 95% of the country; about 30% of the country doesn't even use paper ballots to allow a serious re-count; and these electronic voting machines frequently produce results impossible in a legitimate election, such as John Kerry's negative 25 million votes in Youngstown, OH (Nov. 2004), or Palm Beach County's 12,000 votes in excess of the number of voters (Aug. 2008).
These self-described "election integrity advocates" say there is no way to prove federal election results. They further allege that media is abandoning its most basic principles by publishing election results as fact, when the information has not and can not be independently verified. Worse still, they say, is that media reports of election results rely on only one source--the government--even though the government can not prove the reported results.
Opponents argue federal election results are provable because. Just because.
While this is fairly convincing, the Journal could do a genuine public service in affording more space for elaboration of this point of view. The Journal could also encourage the media industry at large to advocate for hand counting paper ballots, reasoning that this method of counting allows media greatest access to observing and documenting the process, affording the reported results the greatest credibility, and demonstrating that the reported results have been proven to the satisfaction of the thousands of ordinary Americans who would be involved in counting ballots.
Dave Berman
Eureka, CA
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10/peter-b-collins-dave-berman-to-discuss.html
Labels: hand-counting paper ballots, inconclusive, John Nichols, Michael Collins, North Coast Journal, Paul Lehto, Peter B. Collins, Scoop, The Nation, unprovable
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Hurricane Gustav, Shock Doctrine and "Election" Events
Hurricane Gustav bearing down on New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, expected to hit Monday, has already affected the presidential candidates' campaign calculus, and completely altered the media's telling of the campaign narrative. The NY Times reports the Republican convention scheduled to start tomorrow will be held in a very scaled back form and that the storm has also deflected media attention from both Obama's Thursday night acceptance speech (YouTube) and McCain's Friday veep announcement (YouTube).
If there is destruction and chaos on the Gulf Coast, this could easily become the pretext for triggering federal martial law, as reportedly occurred locally in some places following Katrina. Only now the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive has modified succession of powers, enabling any event to trigger consolidation of all government under the executive. See Naomi Wolf's "End of America" for various historical precursors to this "echo," a repeating pattern in which the rise to absolute power comes through a series of superficially legal maneuvers, including funking up elections.
Because November's "election" event, if it is even conducted, cannot produce a conclusive and verifiable outcome, the People's huge preference must be undeniably evidenced prior to that. 84,000 were in attendance for Obama's outdoor stadium acceptance speech, which saw all tickets accounted for in a one day application process. On Friday, McCain announced the relatively unknown yet scandal-plagued Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate at a rally that couldn't fill a 10,000 seat venue. Lost in the equation are compelling visual examples of Obama's clear and commanding lead. Instead, the media perpetuate the false narrative of a close race.
Let me be clear that I endorse no candidate. I'm a fair election supporter. Though I don't think he'll be a revolutionary agent of change, if Obama has the votes to win then he should win. But first he should become outspoken about the process. Part of addressing the process, from my view, in this case, is something Obama supporters could do. I'm not usually in the position of offering advice to this seemingly massive and growing majority, but this is what I can see as the most likely way to ensure the outcome of the "election" event reflects the will of the People.
As with the juxtaposition of the numbers above, there must be constant and overwhelming collective displays of public Obama preference beyond individual expressions such as buttons, bumper stickers and lawn signs. There must be aggressive efforts to ensure the media depiction, including reporting on opinion polls, shows comparisons of candidate support are unequivocal. In this way, just having the "election" event becomes a formality. The inherent uncertainty of the unverifiable results may be neutralized without the suspense and doubt of a seemingly close race, a facade created for the power play necessary to funk up the results.
In addition, these pre-"election" displays need to directly address what will be done should the outcome be funked up. For that matter, such demonstrations of People power also ought to address rejecting the final dictatorial power grab looming over us, threatening the prospect of even having an "election" event. Velvet Revolution has launched a campaign to encourage and support candidates who raise challenges to election results. They also have a prosecute Karl Rove campaign.
Lest anyone think my suggestions or perspective are partisan, I reiterate my view that this is all simulated competition and Obama is in many ways a false alternative. That is not to say Obama and McCain are identical, but rather that Obama's talk of change is woefully inadequate at busting the myths of democracy, capitalism, free speech, free press, free markets and the rest of The Big Lie. However, while McCain appears ready to use the storm backdrop for political theater, Obama is pledging to wait and see, then organize, inspire and motivate citizen volunteers to assist in the aftermath.
And what can we expect this to look like? There is already a heavily armed military and law enforcement presence, while the war criminal enterprise Blackwater seeks to hire more mercenaries for the scene. The Department of Homeland Security (sic), FEMA (sic), and the Department of Defense (sic) will of course interfere with the command of state governors. And in a recurring theme here at WDNC lately, Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" illustrates the pattern of exploitative security and privatization responses to disasters.
Pulling that thread just a little further, the North Coast Journal recently published Shane C. Brinton's book review of "Shock Doctrine," followed by my letter to the editor based on the review (the letter was given the great title of "Fascists!"). This week's Journal includes another wonderfully titled letter "Mas Fascismo" based on my letter.
The Journal is a free weekly paper with a focus on local Humboldt County, CA events. I always enjoy seeing them publish letters from readers outside our area, and in this case from an H.M Johnson coincidentally located in Redwood Falls, Minnesota, just under 100 miles from the partly aborted Republican convention, where some blatantly fascist police tactics have been used on protesters. See Uptake.org for lots of video, and also Twin Cities Daily Planet for some additional reporting.
Between Gustav and two potential flash points to create excuses for declaring martial law, this is shaping up to be a dangerous week.
October 17, 2007
Official White House Transcript
Q Mr. President, following up on Vladimir Putin for a moment. He said recently that next year when he has to step down, according to the constitution, as President, he may become Prime Minister, in effect keeping power and dashing any hopes for a genuine democratic transition there. Senator McCain --
THE PRESIDENT: I've been planning that myself. (Laughter.)
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08/hurricane-gustav-shock-doctrine-and.html
Labels: false alternative, fascism, Gustav, inherent uncertainty, Katrina, martial law, McCain, Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, North Coast Journal, Obama, Palin, simulated competition, Velvet Revolution
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Fascists! (NC Journal Prints My LTTE re Shock Doctrine Book Review)
Friday night I posted a brief comment about a review of Naomi Klein's book, "Shock Doctrine," published in the North Coast Journal. I mentioned that the post was a variation on a letter to the editor I was about to submit, which the Journal published this week, at newsstands now but not yet online (though I predict this link will work tomorrow, and if not I'll post an update). Dig the title, including punctuation!North Coast Journal
The only thing edited from how I submitted that letter is the un-capitalized G in good Americans. The expression Good Americans has been used increasingly in the past few years, serving as another historical echo to the fabled Good Germans who failed to stop Hitler's rise. Actually, after browsing some links, I see that the phrase is not always capitalized, so perhaps I needed to put it in quotes. At any rate, good on the Journal for publishing the book review, and now the letter in response.
Mailbox
August 14, 2008
Fascists!
Editor:
Thank you for publishing Shane C. Brinton's review of Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism" (Aug. 7). The most important point Brinton makes is at the very end: "Klein hasn't discovered something new so much as she has explained how a very old strategy is manifesting itself in even more atrocious ways."
I had a similar thought reading Naomi Wolf's "End of America" (see Journal book review, Oct. 25, 2007), and John Perkins' "Confessions of An Economic Hitman." Historical patterns, or echoes, are revealed through myriad examples in each of these books, which all lay bare what we seem to be collectively trying to deny.
But what's that old saying about if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck? Around the world and throughout time, this is what has been called fascism. I'm not discovering anything new either - just reminding my good American neighbors that it can happen here and it is.
Dave Berman
Eureka, CA
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08/fascists-nc-journal-prints-my-ltte-re.html
Labels: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, End of America, fascism, Good Americans, Good Germans, Hitler, John Perkins, Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, North Coast Journal, Shane C. Brinton, Shock Doctrine
Friday, August 08, 2008
North Coast Journal Reviews "Shock Doctrine"
Shane C. Brinton reviews Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism" in this week's North Coast Journal. I've mentioned this book a few times here at We Do Not Consent, but since I never got around to writing a review, I'm glad to see the Journal run this. I will be sending a letter to the editor thanking them, and making a variation on just the one point I want to make here now. Brinton's review concludes:If this book has a weakness it is, perhaps, Klein's apparent belief that the "shock doctrine" is something new and that she has cracked the case. While Milton Friedman's cold, calculating brand of capitalism is especially disgusting, the use of collective trauma for political and economic gains was around long before he was. Klein hasn't discovered something new so much as she has explained how a very old strategy is manifesting itself in even more atrocious ways. Still, this is an extremely well written, enlightening book, one of the best by a left-wing author in the last decade.
Brinton is totally right on about Klein not discovering something, but rather showing us more repeating patterns, or "historical echoes," to use Naomi Wolf's term from "End of America." I think this is a very effective way to create context and aids us in re-framing the way we discuss many of America's myths, such as so-called "free markets," "free press," and "free speech." Brinton didn't go there, unfortunately, and perhaps even lazily reinforced the shallow and unnecessary paradigm of Klein as "left-wing." I wish instead he had pointed out that the current echoes playing out have always defined what has been called fascism.
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08/north-coast-journal-reviews-shock.html
Labels: End of America, fasicm, myths, Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, North Coast Journal, Shane C. Brinton, Shock Doctrine
Monday, August 04, 2008
Naomi Wolf: Dear world, please confront America
I've blogged about author Naomi Wolf several times before. On Friday, Daily News Egypt (archive) published her op-ed called "Dear world, please confront America." Yet again she has struck a chord I can't ignore:But, while grassroots pressure has not worked, money still talks. We need targeted government-led sanctions against the US by civilized countries, including international divestment of capital. Many studies have shown that tying investment to democracy and human rights reform is effective in the developing world. There is no reason why it can't be effective against the world's superpower.
Sad but true, and once again reminding me of an old essay of mine I've oft quoted here at the We Do Not Consent blog. I wrote these words during the indeterminate period following the 2000 "election":
We also need an internationally coordinated strategy for prosecuting war criminals at the top and further down the chain of command - individual countries pressing charges, as Italy and France have done. Although the United States is not a signatory to the statute that established the International Criminal Court, violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions are war crimes for which anyone - potentially even the US president - may be tried in any of the other 193 countries that are parties to the conventions. The whole world can hunt these criminals down.
An outlaw America is a global problem that threatens the rest of the international community. If this regime gets away with flouting international law, what is to prevent the next administration - or this administration, continuing under its secret succession plan in the event of an emergency - from going further and targeting its political opponents at home and abroad?
We Americans are either too incapable, or too dysfunctional, to help ourselves right now. Like drug addicts or the mentally ill who refuse treatment, we need our friends to intervene. So remember us as we were in our better moments, and take action to save us - and the world - from ourselves.If any world leaders are indeed scrupulous, shouldn't *they* contest the legitimacy of the recent U.S. Presidential election? Could you imagine if impartial voices of reason from around the world helped us to hold up the mirror displaying our own ridiculous image?
Of course when I wrote that it was not inevitable that Americans would roll over (and over and over) for the march to fascism. I don't claim prescience either, though I'll also quote not for the first time Rage Against the Machine, from their 1992 song "Settle For Nothing":
In the final analysis, either foreign powers will choose not to recognize our next government or the entire world will be complicit in our illegitimacy. Either way, it would not only serve us right, it will be what we deserve."If we don't take action now, we settle for nothing later. We'll settle for nothing now, and we'll settle for nothing later."
Americans have been doing that repeatedly despite one egregious injustice after another. We're past realizing they don't represent us; we're past plainly calling them liars; we're past even revealing enough to prove war crimes. Maybe we Americans have more in common with average Iraqis than we realize - both our peoples have become subjects of the same occupiers, another point I've made previously.
I'm struck now by the thought it is no wonder I've been posting so infrequently. When I do I'm barely more than repeating myself. Then I'm reminded of my friend Paul Lehto, who is fond of reminding us that early American pamphleteer Thomas Paine noted that not all people will simultaneously conclude revolution has become necessary. Those of us who figure it out earlier on bear the responsibility of bringing others on board, serving as teachers to repeat our message as often as needed. And so, at least right now, I'm back at it, dear WDNC readers:Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!
And kudos to Naomi Wolf for indefatigably reiterating and updating her lesson (see her book "End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot; and my North Coast Journal book review). We need to expand the ways we consider transformational strategy.
And one more thing. Another part of what's been keeping me quiet is the maxed out noise factor of being a news follower - and I don't even own a television! Just from online reading, some radio, and an occasional youtube video, I can't escape the sense that Americans are trapped within the parameters of a public dialog that goes nowhere near the relevant issues necessary to deliver us out of fascism. As I said in So-ing The Seeds of Change, all pretenses of progress will be mere illusions (and slogans of hope and change unfortunate delusions) unless and until we restore justice and the rule of law. Let's not be too proud or stubborn about how we help ourselves.
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08/naomi-wolf-dear-world-please-confront.html
Labels: Daily News Egypt, End of America, fascism, Naomi Wolf, North Coast Journal, Paul Lehto, peaceful revolution, Rage Against The Machine, Thomas Paine
Friday, January 25, 2008
Rabbi Les Scores Points For Voter Confidence Committee
Voter Confidence Committee member Rabbi Les Scharnberg scored big this week with an OpEd in the Arcata Eye, plus a great front page quote in Tuesday's Eureka-Times Standard's coverage of the NAACP event honoring MLK on Monday:Rabbi Lester Scharnberg said the dream of the freedom to vote has become a nightmare, especially as voters are putting faith into vote-counting machines.
Les's speech during the event had such great impact that he was invited to make a presentation to both the local NAACP board of directors, and also the Humboldt County Human Rights Commission. Way to go Les!
"Now the threats to individual freedoms are more subtle," he said. "We're being asked to put our trust into a machine. They no longer allow us to count the votes hand by hand. Look closely at the dream of those who died to have your vote counted."
The VCC also got ink this week in this T-S letter to the editor by new VCC member Bob Olofson. An unrelated (and somewhat bizarre) LTTE by Donna-Lee Phillips also questions the use of electronic voting machines.
The VCC is putting finishing touches on a poll watching program for the Feb. 5 primary. I hope to have more details announced about that by the end of the day.
Meanwhile, one more media reference from this week, found in the North Coast Journal's lengthy report on Bill Clinton's recent visit to Eureka:McKinleyville resident David Berman seemed to be in charge, conferring with the Secret Service agent and with Lauren Levinson, a young campaign worker from the Hillary for President Sacramento office sporting a bright green Team Hillary scarf. (Berman is not to be confused with the Eureka elections activist of the same name.)
In the first day or two after Clinton's visit, a few people asked me if I was at the event or involved in any way. I had no idea why I was being asked this, but now the Journal article makes it clear. Too bad for this other Berman because the article lays a bit of blame at his feet for the hundreds or more people who were left in the cold, unable get into the event or even find an available bathroom as they waited. Worse still for Berman, the Journal reports:David Berman, who was running the show, declined to answer questions on the record after the event. (On the day of the event, he had told a reporter that it is considered extremely bad form for an advance man to appear in a story.)
Bad form indeed. Still, this was a compliment to me, as far as I can see, and the second such one in the Journal in recent weeks. Recall Marcy Burstiner's December 6 comment:I like having the Eureka Reporter around. It gives jobs to my current and former students. And it prints any opinion out there. For those who see it as a bullhorn for Arkley, they ignore how it prints columns by Amy Goodman, Dave Berman and others.
That's two articles in two months that refer to me even though the articles had nothing to do with me and weren't quoting me. It is very flattering, really.
Permalink:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/01/rabbi-les-scores-points-for-voter.html
Labels: Arcata Eye, Bill Clinton, Bob Olofson, Eureka Times-Standard, Humboldt Human Rights Commission, Marcy Burstiner, NAACP, North Coast Journal, Rabbi Les Scharnberg, Voter Confidence Committee
