Cynical Nation

Isn't it funny, CRB, when you posted John Fund's article back on September 24th that you didn't chide Mr. Fund for only writing about potential fraud committed by Democrats? While I am reading John Fund's "Stealing Elections", I understand that the author is a partisan conservative who, in addition to writing for WSJ also has worked for Rush Limbaugh and other prominent conservatives. So I take it with a grain of salt when Fund dismisses "Internet Conspiracies" on the one hand, while admitting that there are real voting problems (the kind cited in his book)across the country. Nonetheless, I have to ask Mr. Fund whether or not any attempt at voting fraud is in fact a conspiracy and, when he writes on Opinion Journal about those conspiracies, is he not indulging himself in "internet conspiracies." (I am not saying that I dismiss what Mr. Fund says out of hand. I understand that when he keeps citing fraud committed by Democrats, it could be that only Democrats commit fraud or it could be that Mr. Fund has a bias.)

No matter. Repeat after CRB, only Democrats commit fraud... only Democrats comit fraud..

So now that we have established that only Democrats commit fraud.. what accusations are you making regarding Pennsylvania? Are you concerned about voter registration fraud cited on some (Internet) sites prior to the election? Or is it votes being placed on the machines as alleged by (the Internet conspiracist) Drudge election day morning? Or is it that you just that you like to say the word "Pennsylvania" when any non-Republican suggests there be a recount in, say, Ohio?

(Really, I have tried to do some research on fraud in Pennsylvania. I would like to know what you got.)

As far as Keith "Cave Man" Olbermann goes, isn't he reporting on an election that was less than one month ago? Also, isn't he reporting on a recount that is scheduled to begin on December 6th? Yes, it probably won't change the outcome, but he is reporting on an active attempt to recount the vote and, given that all the conservatives are watching Fox News anyway, doesn't it make sense that Olbermann devise an outreach to potential liberal nutcase viewers like myself by covering a story that neither MSM or Fox News are covering?

And, frankly, I don't know all the details regarding the island cave guy, but somehow I don't think it would be that great of a story if he was still fighting just three weeks after Japan surrendered.

And as far as Pennsylvania goes, show me a challenge to report on, as Olbermann has reported on other challenges including local and state elections in North Carolina.

To me, potential voting fraud remains an issue for the future, whether or not it changes the outcome of the most recent election, and I am happy that both Keith Olbermann and John Fund, from the left and right, are pursuing this story in their own way. Personally, I think recounts can be valuable tools to see just how accurate the current systems are.. but, I suppose, that I am just a caveman internet conspiracy nutcase that didn't get the memo that only Democrats commit fraud.

I'm specifically referring to the illegal practice of college students being sent into the Philadelphia prisons to register and collect absentee ballots. The college students were also given access to prison felon wings that housed no eligible voters. Perhaps you hadn't heard of it in North Jersey, PE, but it made the Philly evening news down here.

Here are some more examples:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04307/405321.stm

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13296036&BRD=1725&PAG=461&dept_id=45529&rfi=6

And perhaps you can explain this unique Philadelphia statistic:

Total age eligible aged persons in Philly : Overall Philly population in 2003 (1,479,339 estimate) - those under 18 (25.3% of 1,479,339) = 1,105,066

Total number of people registered to vote in Philly 2004 - 1,035,395

Although not an exact calculation, almost 94% of all potentially eligible voters in Philadelphia were registered to vote in the 2004 election. And when you subtract the resident felons in the Philadelphia prison system who have lost their right to vote, that registered % goes even HIGHER.

Sources:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42101.html

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-10042004-376969.html

I will check out all those sites first thing tomorrow. Thanks for taking the time to list them.

Interesting topic for a blog post, CRB. Previously you said you weren't really concerned about the integrity of our democratic process. Change of heart?

No, I'm not concerned with the process. I don't think there is any more fraud today than in the past, and it rarely affects the end result.

But I am amused by members of the media who are obsessed with Ohio, hoping that the outcome will change while ignoring everything else.

The member(s) of the media everybody keeps citing is Keith Olbermann whose talk show runs third that hour among the three cable TV news outlets. Does Keith Olbermann represent MSM? Hardly, when you consider that the Washington Post, the New York Times, and even Ron Kuby, one of two remaining libs on WABC, have essentially dismissed the Ohio recount.

The Ohio recount is a story only in that a recount will be happening (at least according to the law anyway.) Since the slim chance of uncovering major irregularities could potentially change the result of the election, I am sure the recount will generate some interest, but that interest will dissipate as soon as the results start coming in.

BTW, I have listened to Olbermann covering many other voting stories, including local results in North Carolina and Texas. Maybe he personally is obsessed, if you will, but I can think of stories of lesser importance to investigate.

As far as voting fraud today as compared to the past, the existance of electronic voting without a paper trail does present new possibilities for committing fraud on a much wider scale. It also makes certain fraud difficult to investigate, which resulted in talk of a do over in North Carolina because there can be no backup method of recounting once there is electronic failure.

I agree with you that interest will dissipate, PE, and that's unfortunate. However, this is something everyone should be concerned with, regardless of who they voted for. Even if they do a recount and Bush still wins Ohio, but they find a substantial discrepancies between the original and recount numbers, it should serve as a wake-up call that these newer voting systems have serious flaws that should be dealt with immediately.

Oh, yeah, same goes for Pennsylvania. If there is a concern about the validity of the numbers, recount. Leave no stone unturned.