The point should be to distribute this kind of provocative information as widely as possible, look for any publication elsewhere, generate letters to the editor and Congress. If the people who do these things believe that no one is paying attention, as all the voters should be in a democracy, then they can continue to operate with confidence; if the system is rigged, why bother concealing your contempt for the little guy, the minority voter, the independents?
If the system is rigged, why hide the arrogance of your policy's intent to permanently institute a class society based on wealth, making education more difficult for all but a few of the lower classes? Note that there will be ballot challenges to affirmative action by diehard activists who are angry with the Supreme Court and also Pres. Bush for signing it (especially since he seemed to endorse the opposite opinion previously). If the system is rigged, do you really have to be concerned about consequences of policy on political campaigns? Not really. You simply remove those individuals who will receive too much negative attention during the political season, or who have "baggage" that might not survive a congressional hearing, or whose loyalty is not established. Hence, Whitman is gone, so is Ari Fleischer. There has always been some form of election fraud. Personally, I like the way the Canadians do it, with small polling stations so that paper ballots can be tabulated and checked quickly. But we have a much larger population. But until people are aware of the potential for abuse, and motivated to safeguard their right to a free and untainted election, we should not be silent or complacent, even when sometimes the evidence is alarming, provocative or hard to procure. - KWC _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
