| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"No One" |
| Date: |
31 Mar 2004 11:41:07 PM |
| Object: |
Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
It seems a bunch of San Jose's Evangelical residents want to recall
the mayor and the city council (or most of it) over a same-sex
marriage flap. The city passed a law giving married same-sex couples
the same benefits given to other married city employees *provided*
that the marriages are determined to be legal by the courts. Mostly
the additional benefits are things like not having to wait until an
"open enrollment" period before coverage starts - things married
couples take for granted. The "Christians" are apparently a rather
hateful and mean spirited lot - in some cases the people being
denied immediate coverage are adopted children.
Not all Christians are pleased with these antics and are getting tired
of these Evangelicals trying to speak for them. But we know which
"Christians" George Bush is supporting, and he probably doesn't
realize how many votes he'll lose over it.
.
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
03 Apr 2004 03:31:01 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 10:32:22 -0800,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
It seems a bunch of San Jose's Evangelical residents want to
recall the mayor and the city council (or most of it) over a same-sex
marriage flap. The city passed a law giving married same-sex couples
the same benefits given to other married city employees *provided*
that the marriages are determined to be legal by the courts. Mostly
the additional benefits are things like not having to wait until an
"open enrollment" period before coverage starts - things married
couples take for granted. The "Christians" are apparently a rather
hateful and mean spirited lot - in some cases the people being
denied immediate coverage are adopted children.
Sadly, the Christians with compassion and empathy for others
aren't taking care of their rabid brethen.
And equally unfortunately, 'WAY too many normal and
unobtrusive Christians don't seem to realize that the continuation
of many of our most fundamental liberties DEPENDS upon our
doing that **very** soon!
Many of those most fundamental liberties have already vanished.
And many MORE are on the edge. NOW those frothing-at-the-mouth
fanatics are pressuring the government to censor such innocuous TV
programming as *soap operas* and shows like "Oprah" !!! And the
**SCARY** part is that many people in Washington actually are STUPID
enough to **listen** to those rabid nitwits!! When they SHOULD be
telling them all *instead* to go take a flying leap!
Not all Christians are pleased with these antics and are getting tired
of these Evangelicals trying to speak for them. But we know which
"Christians" George Bush is supporting, and he probably doesn't
realize how many votes he'll lose over it.
Why should Bush care? Fundamentalist Republicans control the
electronic voting machines.
To see just HOW critically-important that is, see:
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
I'm aware how critically important that is. There's no accountability
and fundamentalist christian republicans control the companies making
the machines.
America is getting DANGEROUSLY close to the abyss envisioned by
Orwell in "1984." Anbd it looks like the ducking-stool-mentality RRR
cultists will be the instrument of that cataclysm -- **UNLESS**
Americans can wake up FAST, and **counter** it!
I hope the below article is an April Fool's joke.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/8325298.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
Posted on Thu, Apr. 01, 2004
HAND RECOUNTS
Bill could torpedo video-voting printouts
An elections bill says that hand recounts of votes are only for ballots
marked with pencil. That makes skeptics of touch-screen voting upset.
BY STEVE HARRISON
sharrison@herald.com
TALLAHASSEE - The push to equip electronic voting machines with paper
printers suffered a blow Wednesday when a Senate committee passed a bill
forbidding manual recounts on touch-screen equipment.
A hand count of votes would only be allowed on ''marked ballots,'' where
a canvassing board could determine voter intent through stray pencil
marks.
But the bill could have unintended consequences, thwarting a drive to
use paper printers as a backup to touch-screen voting.
''Even if you had it, you wouldn't be able to use it,'' noted Leon
County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho. ``An opponent could say the
canvassing board is forbidden to do it.''
U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton, has sued in federal court
demanding that Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and other touch-screen
voting counties use paper printers. His argument is that those counties'
voters are treated differently.
''It is inconceivable to me that, after what happened in the 2000
presidential election, Republicans in Tallahassee would have the
audacity to introduce legislation, which denies voters in the 15 Florida
counties with touch-screen voting machines the means to conduct a manual
recount, while leaving 52 counties with a way to conduct one,'' Wexler
said in a statement.
The recount provision was part of a broad elections bill sponsored by
state Sen. Anna Cowin, R-Leesburg. It passed the committee on ethics and
elections unanimously. It's scheduled to be heard by four other Senate
committees.
Close races would still be subject to a mechanical recount in all
counties.
Pasco County elections supervisor Kurt Browning spoke in favor of the
bill, stressing that electronic equipment doesn't allow overvotes --
where someone votes more than once in a single race -- so there is
nothing to count by hand. And he added that voters have the right not to
vote in races, thus registering an ``undervote.''
University of Miami law professor Martha Mahoney spoke against the bill,
saying electronic counties need the luxury to review votes by hand.
''If we do away with manual recounts we are in danger of having votes
not being counted,'' she said.
© 2004 The Miami Herald and wire service sources
--
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
03 Apr 2004 11:48:58 PM |
|
|
Craig Chilton wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 10:32:22 -0800,
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
It seems a bunch of San Jose's Evangelical residents want to
recall the mayor and the city council (or most of it) over a same-sex
marriage flap. The city passed a law giving married same-sex couples
the same benefits given to other married city employees *provided*
that the marriages are determined to be legal by the courts. Mostly
the additional benefits are things like not having to wait until an
"open enrollment" period before coverage starts - things married
couples take for granted. The "Christians" are apparently a rather
hateful and mean spirited lot - in some cases the people being
denied immediate coverage are adopted children.
Sadly, the Christians with compassion and empathy for others
aren't taking care of their rabid brethen.
And equally unfortunately, 'WAY too many normal and
unobtrusive Christians don't seem to realize that the continuation
of many of our most fundamental liberties DEPENDS upon our
doing that **very** soon!
Many of those most fundamental liberties have already vanished.
And many MORE are on the edge. NOW those frothing-at-the-mouth
fanatics are pressuring the government to censor such innocuous TV
programming as *soap operas* and shows like "Oprah" !!! And the
**SCARY** part is that many people in Washington actually are STUPID
enough to **listen** to those rabid nitwits!! When they SHOULD be
telling them all *instead* to go take a flying leap!
Not all Christians are pleased with these antics and are getting tired
of these Evangelicals trying to speak for them. But we know which
"Christians" George Bush is supporting, and he probably doesn't
realize how many votes he'll lose over it.
Why should Bush care? Fundamentalist Republicans control the
electronic voting machines.
To see just HOW critically-important that is, see:
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
I'm aware how critically important that is. There's no accountability
and fundamentalist christian republicans control the companies making
the machines.
America is getting DANGEROUSLY close to the abyss envisioned by
Orwell in "1984." Anbd it looks like the ducking-stool-mentality RRR
cultists will be the instrument of that cataclysm -- **UNLESS**
Americans can wake up FAST, and **counter** it!
Well, the interesting thing about this electronic voting is the fact
that it is meant to fix the problems that occured in Florida. Queestion,
why didn't they just simply have sheets of paper with names of
candidates and a place where a person can put an almight tick on if they
want to vote for that particular person? why use tabs? Why not use
graphite selection process where you have little circles, the person
blacks out the candidate he/she wishes to vote for, then when counting
comes, the computer can read where the mark is on the page and who it
corresponds to (they use this technique for SATs in NZ).
Matt
--
http://home.iprimus.com.au/matgarnz
"Atheism is a non-prophet organisation"
"Mays Gilliam didn't attend the 'Rally to Fight Cancer'
last year. Does this mean Mays Gilliam is for Cancer?
A vote for Mays Gilliam is a vote for Cancer." - Head of State
"Baldrick, you are as thick as some extra-clotted clotted
cream that has been left out in the rain by some clot, so
much that you couldn't unclot it with an electric
declotter." - Edmund Blackadder
"I have a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and
call it a weasel!" - Edmund Blackadder
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
04 Apr 2004 12:02:17 AM |
|
|
Matt <kaiwainz@yahoo.com.au> writes:
Well, the interesting thing about this electronic voting is the fact
that it is meant to fix the problems that occured in
Florida. Queestion, why didn't they just simply have sheets of paper
with names of candidates and a place where a person can put an almight
tick on if they want to vote for that particular person? why use tabs?
Why not use graphite selection process where you have little circles,
the person blacks out the candidate he/she wishes to vote for, then
when counting comes, the computer can read where the mark is on the
page and who it corresponds to (they use this technique for SATs in
NZ).
The voting machine companies probably make more money off of the
electronic machines. They *look* like big ticket items. Also, the
news networks want instant results.
BTW, we will probably have a requirement in California that the
machines produce a paper trail that a voter can cross check, and
that a third party can check against what the machines record.
If you hand count 1000 ballots that were randomly selected, you can
do a pretty good job of validating the election, counting more by
hand if it is was close.
Any state that does not require a paper trail or some other completely
transparent means to verify the election is asking for election fraud
and public distrust.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
04 Apr 2004 02:06:36 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 06:02:17 GMT, No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net>,
Message ID: <m3oeq8cmes.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
Matt <kaiwainz@yahoo.com.au> writes:
Well, the interesting thing about this electronic voting is the fact
that it is meant to fix the problems that occured in
Florida. Queestion, why didn't they just simply have sheets of paper
with names of candidates and a place where a person can put an almight
tick on if they want to vote for that particular person? why use tabs?
Why not use graphite selection process where you have little circles,
the person blacks out the candidate he/she wishes to vote for, then
when counting comes, the computer can read where the mark is on the
page and who it corresponds to (they use this technique for SATs in
NZ).
The voting machine companies probably make more money off of the
electronic machines. They *look* like big ticket items. Also, the
news networks want instant results.
BTW, we will probably have a requirement in California that the
machines produce a paper trail that a voter can cross check, and
that a third party can check against what the machines record.
If you hand count 1000 ballots that were randomly selected, you can
do a pretty good job of validating the election, counting more by
hand if it is was close.
Any state that does not require a paper trail or some other completely
transparent means to verify the election is asking for election fraud
and public distrust.
As 2000 showed.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
04 Apr 2004 05:09:03 PM |
|
|
stoney <stoney@the.net> writes:
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 06:02:17 GMT, No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net>,
Message ID: <m3oeq8cmes.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
Any state that does not require a paper trail or some other completely
transparent means to verify the election is asking for election fraud
and public distrust.
As 2000 showed.
Just to add some more to the discussion. There are actually a number
of approaches being investigate. See
<http://www.cs.rice.edu/~dwallach/pub/remote-voting2003.html> for one
based on visual cryptography.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
05 Apr 2004 12:54:06 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 22:09:03 GMT, No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net>,
Message ID: <m3brm7pfbz.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
stoney <stoney@the.net> writes:
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 06:02:17 GMT, No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net>,
Message ID: <m3oeq8cmes.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
Any state that does not require a paper trail or some other completely
transparent means to verify the election is asking for election fraud
and public distrust.
As 2000 showed.
Just to add some more to the discussion. There are actually a number
of approaches being investigate. See
<http://www.cs.rice.edu/~dwallach/pub/remote-voting2003.html> for one
based on visual cryptography.
Very interesting article. Thank you for the link. :)
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Evangelicals madder than a hatter in San Jose |
04 Apr 2004 04:16:00 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:48:58 +1000,
Matt <kaiwainz@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Craig Chilton wrote:
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
It seems a bunch of San Jose's Evangelical residents want to
recall the mayor and the city council (or most of it) over a same-sex
marriage flap. The city passed a law giving married same-sex couples
the same benefits given to other married city employees *provided*
that the marriages are determined to be legal by the courts. Mostly
the additional benefits are things like not having to wait until an
"open enrollment" period before coverage starts - things married
couples take for granted. The "Christians" are apparently a rather
hateful and mean spirited lot - in some cases the people being
denied immediate coverage are adopted children.
Sadly, the Christians with compassion and empathy for others
aren't taking care of their rabid brethen.
And equally unfortunately, 'WAY too many normal and
unobtrusive Christians don't seem to realize that the continuation
of many of our most fundamental liberties DEPENDS upon our
doing that **very** soon!
Many of those most fundamental liberties have already vanished.
And many MORE are on the edge. NOW those frothing-at-the-mouth
fanatics are pressuring the government to censor such innocuous TV
programming as *soap operas* and shows like "Oprah" !!! And the
**SCARY** part is that many people in Washington actually are STUPID
enough to **listen** to those rabid nitwits!! When they SHOULD be
telling them all *instead* to go take a flying leap!
Not all Christians are pleased with these antics and are getting tired
of these Evangelicals trying to speak for them. But we know which
"Christians" George Bush is supporting, and he probably doesn't
realize how many votes he'll lose over it.
Why should Bush care? Fundamentalist Republicans control the
electronic voting machines.
To see just HOW critically-important that is, see:
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
I'm aware how critically important that is. There's no accountability
and fundamentalist christian republicans control the companies making
the machines.
America is getting DANGEROUSLY close to the abyss envisioned by
Orwell in "1984." Anbd it looks like the ducking-stool-mentality RRR
cultists will be the instrument of that cataclysm -- **UNLESS**
Americans can wake up FAST, and **counter** it!
Well, the interesting thing about this electronic voting is the fact
that it is meant to fix the problems that occured in Florida. Queestion,
why didn't they just simply have sheets of paper with names of
candidates and a place where a person can put an almight tick on if they
want to vote for that particular person? why use tabs? Why not use
graphite selection process where you have little circles, the person
blacks out the candidate he/she wishes to vote for, then when counting
comes, the computer can read where the mark is on the page and who it
corresponds to (they use this technique for SATs in NZ).
It's the way we vote here in Iowa, too! Flawless, and VERY
easy. And makes, as well, for FAST and **verifiable** vote-counting!
Diebold's machines are RIGHT out of Orwell's "1984." They couldn't
possibly have planned it any more cunningly. I'm AMAZED that the
Democrats in Congress haven't dropped EVERYTHING else and
demanded 100% focus on THIS crisis. They must be blind as bats
in a Pennsylvania coal mine at midnight during a new moon!
Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
