Improve in HDL (good) cholesterol
this site is so great Recapture your youth and Feel the Energy For Many, This is a Powerful Second Chance press here to read about This common element can change the way you experience the next half of your life -Original Message- From: Aruba PO1200 Oranjestad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 2, 2004 4:18AM To: larisa; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; clifton; latrice; deanne Subject: I received excellent customer service not now, then the post office address is listed in link This room proved to have two doors, one connecting with the auditorium and the other letting into a side street. Both were locked, but Rob pointed the electric tube at the outside door and broke the lock in an instant. Then he walked into the street as composedly as if he had lived all his life in London. This was a very interesting experience to them, and Dorothy said: I wonder why it is that we can walk so easily in the air.
The Values-Vote Myth
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/opinion/06brooks.html?hp=pagewanted=printposition= The New York Times November 6, 2004 OP-ED COLUMNIST The Values-Vote Myth By DAVID BROOKS Every election year, we in the commentariat come up with a story line to explain the result, and the story line has to have two features. First, it has to be completely wrong. Second, it has to reassure liberals that they are morally superior to the people who just defeated them. In past years, the story line has involved Angry White Males, or Willie Horton-bashing racists. This year, the official story is that throngs of homophobic, Red America values-voters surged to the polls to put George Bush over the top. This theory certainly flatters liberals, and it is certainly wrong. Here are the facts. As Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center points out, there was no disproportionate surge in the evangelical vote this year. Evangelicals made up the same share of the electorate this year as they did in 2000. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who are pro-life. Sixteen percent of voters said abortions should be illegal in all circumstances. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who say they pray daily. It's true that Bush did get a few more evangelicals to vote Republican, but Kohut, whose final poll nailed the election result dead-on, reminds us that public opinion on gay issues over all has been moving leftward over the years. Majorities oppose gay marriage, but in the exit polls Tuesday, 25 percent of the voters supported gay marriage and 35 percent of voters supported civil unions. There is a big middle on gay rights issues, as there is on most social issues. Much of the misinterpretation of this election derives from a poorly worded question in the exit polls. When asked about the issue that most influenced their vote, voters were given the option of saying moral values. But that phrase can mean anything - or nothing. Who doesn't vote on moral values? If you ask an inept question, you get a misleading result. The reality is that this was a broad victory for the president. Bush did better this year than he did in 2000 in 45 out of the 50 states. He did better in New York, Connecticut and, amazingly, Massachusetts. That's hardly the Bible Belt. Bush, on the other hand, did not gain significantly in the 11 states with gay marriage referendums. He won because 53 percent of voters approved of his performance as president. Fifty-eight percent of them trust Bush to fight terrorism. They had roughly equal confidence in Bush and Kerry to handle the economy. Most approved of the decision to go to war in Iraq. Most see it as part of the war on terror. The fact is that if you think we are safer now, you probably voted for Bush. If you think we are less safe, you probably voted for Kerry. That's policy, not fundamentalism. The upsurge in voters was an upsurge of people with conservative policy views, whether they are religious or not. The red and blue maps that have been popping up in the papers again this week are certainly striking, but they conceal as much as they reveal. I've spent the past four years traveling to 36 states and writing millions of words trying to understand this values divide, and I can tell you there is no one explanation. It's ridiculous to say, as some liberals have this week, that we are perpetually refighting the Scopes trial, with the metro forces of enlightenment and reason arrayed against the retro forces of dogma and reaction. In the first place, there is an immense diversity of opinion within regions, towns and families. Second, the values divide is a complex layering of conflicting views about faith, leadership, individualism, American exceptionalism, suburbia, Wal-Mart, decorum, economic opportunity, natural law, manliness, bourgeois virtues and a zillion other issues. But the same insularity that caused many liberals to lose touch with the rest of the country now causes them to simplify, misunderstand and condescend to the people who voted for Bush. If you want to understand why Democrats keep losing elections, just listen to some coastal and university town liberals talk about how conformist and intolerant people in Red America are. It makes you wonder: why is it that people who are completely closed-minded talk endlessly about how open-minded they are? What we are seeing is a diverse but stable Republican coalition gradually eclipsing a diverse and stable Democratic coalition. Social issues are important, but they don't come close to telling the whole story. Some of the liberal reaction reminds me of a phrase I came across recently: The rage of the drowning man. -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
John Young: Tyler, Commie is the term used here like is nazi used elsewhere as the most fearsome if thoughtless epithet. Nazi here is a term of endearment, and also admirable role model by some. Calling someone both is not allowed, check the FAQ under impurity. Tim May, praise Allah, always claimed cypherpunks was a fair and balanced forum thanks to the one person of the left here who was fingered affectionately like a house rodent, an easy target for errant shooters. CJ is not to be recalled, ever. Jim Bell still sends very important legal papers, the latest yesterday, which describe the way things should be understood. But who can believe an MIT chemist political prisoner. CJ and Jim jailed by the Democratic freedom-fighters. CJ is CJ Parker, who posted a few emails to this list back in early 2003? I guess I haven't been around long enough to know all famous cpunks who have been posting to the list. Maybe someone could tell in short who those were, I guess there are one or two on the list who weren't around and would appreciate the stories. I think I remember having read about Bell, something about him having threatened FBI agents or something? Does Jim Bell post emails somewhere today?
Congratulations
We recently received the mo r t g age application and it was appr o v ed with 3.5% ra t e. [The application is pending at this moment] If you authorize the process, please enter additional info using secure link below Continue = http://www.greatfins.com/ Thank you. Ariel Alford Please do not reply to this mail.
Broward machines count backward
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2004/11/05/a29a_BROWVOTE_1105.html Palm Beach Post Broward machines count backward By Eliot Kleinberg Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Friday, November 05, 2004 FORT LAUDERDALE - It had to happen. Things were just going too smoothly. Early Thursday, as Broward County elections officials wrapped up after a long day of canvassing votes, something unusual caught their eye. Tallies should go up as more votes are counted. That's simple math. But in some races, the numbers had gone . . . down. Officials found the software used in Broward can handle only 32,000 votes per precinct. After that, the system starts counting backward. Why a voting system would be designed to count backward was a mystery to Broward County Mayor Ilene Lieberman. She was on the phone late Wednesday with Omaha-based Elections Systems and Software. Bad numbers showed up only in running tallies through the day, not the final one. Final tallies were reached by cross-checking machine totals, and officials are confident they are accurate. The glitch affected only the 97,434 absentee ballots, Broward Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes said. All were placed in their own precincts and optical scanners totaled votes, which were then fed to a main computer. That's where the counting problems surfaced. They affected only votes for constitutional amendments 4 through 8, because they were on the only page that was exactly the same on all county absentee ballots. The same software is used in Martin and Miami-Dade counties; Palm Beach and St. Lucie counties use different companies. The problem cropped up in the 2002 election. Lieberman said ESS told her it had sent software upgrades to the Florida Secretary of State's office, but that the office kept rejecting the software. The state said that's not true. Broward elections officials said they had thought the problem was fixed. Secretary of State spokeswoman Jenny Nash said all counties using this system had been told that such problems would occur if a precinct is set up in a way that would allow votes to get above 32,000. She said Broward should have split the absentee ballots into four separate precincts to avoid that and that a Broward elections employee since has admitted to not doing that. But Lieberman said later, No election employee has come to the canvassing board and made the statements that Jenny Nash said occurred. Late Thursday, ESS issued a statement reiterating that it learned of the problems in 2002 and said the software upgrades would be submitted to Hood's office next year. The company was working with the counties it serves to make sure ballots don't exceed capacity and said no other counties reported similar problems. While the county bears the ultimate responsibility for programming the ballot and structuring the precincts, we . . . regret any confusion the discrepancy in early vote totals has caused, the statement said. After several calls to the company during the day were not returned, an ESS spokeswoman said late Thursday she did not know whether ESS contacted the secretary of state two years ago or whether the software is designed to count backward. While the problem surfaced two years ago, it was under a different Br oward elections supervisor and a different secretary of state. Snipes said she had not known about the 2002 snafu. Later, Lieberman said, I am not passing judgments and I'm not pointing a finger. But she said that if ESS is found to be at fault, actions might include penalizing ESS or even defaulting on its contract. -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
RE: The Values-Vote Myth
He won because 53 percent of voters approved of his performance as president. Fifty-eight percent of them trust Bush to fight terrorism. They had roughly equal confidence in Bush and Kerry to handle the economy. Most approved of the decision to go to war in Iraq. Most see it as part of the war on terror. In other words, he won because some hillbilly was afraid that the guy at the local 7-11 was going to blow up his chicked farm. Those of us living close enough to Ground Zero to smell it back in those days are apprarently less than convinced. So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) -TD _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Why Americans Hate Dissenters
On CJ (Carl Johnson) and Jim Bell: There was a time when the greatest terrorist threat to the US was located in the northwestern part of the country, Idaho, Washington State and Oregon, some of California. Militia the infidels were called. The US Attorney's Office in Tacoma, WA, was a center of counterterrorist activity, aided by FBI, Treasury, IRS, US Marshals, DEA and others. Jim Bell was twice busted, tried, convicted and jailed, by the Tacoma USA, for alleged acts against the USG, primarily the IRS, but knowledgeable citizens presume the assault was the result of his essay, Assassination Politics (AP), which descibed a system for anonymous killing of varmints, government officials especially, but not limited to those. CJ defended Jim with a series of online statements on his behalf, and for allegedly running an online version of AP. For this misbehavior he was busted, tried, convicted and jailed, also by the Tacoma USA. Jim served his first term, allegedly misbehaved again, and was sent to jail again, where he remains and continues to file appeals of his railroading. CJ served a term and is now free, pursuing among other wonders his career as the King of Country Porn. Bell and CJ posted regularly to cypherpunks during their days of pre-jailing, and some of their messages here were used against them during trial. An agent of the IRS, Jeff Gordon was a known subscriber of cypherpunks for the purpose of surveilling members and stashing useful email evidence to advance his career -- Jeff was indeed awarded honors for his investigation and jailing of the heroes of the revolution. Here's a US Marshal report on Jeff's snooping: - http://cryptome.org/jdb/usms020499.htm On November 25, 1997, Inspector Jeff GORDAN with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Portland, Oregon, contacted the U.S. Marshals Service, Tacoma, Washington, regarding an internet posting he had obtained on this day (see attached). [http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.97.11.20-97.11.26/msg00274.html] On the same date, Deputy U.S. Marshal STEPHENSON contacted Inspector GORDAN in an attempt obtain further details regarding the individuals mentioned in the internet posting. Inspector GORDAN related the following: On May 17, 1997, the IRS in Vancouver, Washington, arrested James Dalton BELL (#26906-086) for threats, assaults, obstruction, and intimidation of employees and officers of the IRS. During IRS's initial investigation of BELL, the IRS discovered that BELL was associated with the Multnomah County Common Law Court as well as the author of Assassination Politics, an essay that describes and advocates the development and use of a system to reward people who kill selected Government employees. BELL was also known to transmit his beliefs via internet services (see W/WA case #CR97-5270FDB). Inspector GORDON indicated that since BELL's arrest his office has been monitoring internet postings by the Cypherpunks, one of the groups BELL was known to be communicating with. Many of the postings are simply communications between members of the group regarding their dissatisfaction with the Government. Inspector GORDAN related that this posting was a concern due to the statement made by the author, indicating that Tim MAY announced he would be murdering Jim Bell's judge (known to be U.S. District Judge Franklin BURGESS or Magistrate J. Kelly ARNOLD) on Friday, at 4;00 p.m. Inspector GORDAN indicated that he is not familiar with the author of the posting, Bad BobbyH, however he was familiar with Tim MAY. Inspector GORDAN described MAY as being an anarchist/survivalist who seems to spend much of his time communicating his beliefs via the internet. According to Inspector GORDAN, MAY is retired and fairly well off, making his fortune years ago by developing computer programs. May also has a tendency to attempt to goat or bait law enforcement officers into taking action and has repeatedly stated he would shoot any law enforcement officers who attempted to arrest him. Inspector GORDAN provided the following information regarding the individuals mentioned in the posting: Timothy C. MAY (DoB: 12/21/51 SSN: XXX-XX-XXX) XXX Corralltos, CA 95078 Robert HETTINGA XXX Boston, MA 02131 Inspector GORDAN disclosed that his office is unable to trace the posting because the address, Robert Heidegger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), is false/untraceable. On November 25, 1997, U.S. District Judge Franklin BURGESS and Magistrate Judge J. Kelly ARNOLD were notified by Supervisory Deputy Glenn WHALEY and Deputy STEPHENSON reference the internet posting. A copy of the internet posting was forwarded to FBI Special Agent Ron Stankye (360) 695-5661. Attached is a copy of another posting by the Cypherpunks previously received on June 23, 1997 regarding Magistrate J. Kelly ARNOLD. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Deputy STEPHENSON at (253) 593-6344. - Several cypherpunks
Team Favorites: Genuine Football Jerseys
Feel like part of the team
No, Canada!
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2004/11/06/no_canada?mode=PF The Boston Globe THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING No, Canada! You don't want to go there By Alex Beam, Globe Staff | November 6, 2004 You have probably heard the idle chatter: ''I'm thinking of moving to Canada. You may have received the JPEG Sent 'Round the World, labeling the northern part of North America -- the right-thinking part, as liberals would have it -- as the United States of Canada, and the pro-Bush leaning ''red US states as Jesusland. It sounds so alluring. Good beer. Cheap Viagra. Hardly any crime. Friendly, if somewhat ineffectual, people. Terrific, if underappreciated, novelists. (This means you, Rohinton Mistry.) Secure borders, courtesy of the US Department of Defense. But before you pack, consider this: There are plenty of reasons not to move to Canada. Let me count the ways. 1. They don't really want you. Canada is full of losers like you. If you're really rich, or a brain surgeon, maybe. But if you are, say, a newspaper reporter, be prepared to wait at least a year just to live there legally, and several more years to become a citizen. If you have some special qualifications, like a PhD, plus a lot of work experience, and if you are under 50, you have a better chance of crashing the gates of Snow Mexico. Or if you're loaded. That's right. If you have a net worth of $800,000 Canadian or more, and are willing to invest $400,000 of it in Canada, come on in! And you thought George Bush's America was a plutocracy. . . . Think again. 2. Speaking of brain surgery -- have you tried Buffalo? Here is what John Kerry didn't tell you: The problem with free, single-payer health care is that you get what you pay for. Even the Canadians acknowledge that their health system is in crisis. (Sound familiar?) They speak about the inequities of their two-tiered system, where publicly funded patients wait weeks, if not months, to consult specialists or have routine surgery, while private patients get quick service. In fact, it's a three-tiered system. The very well-to-do travel to the United States for some procedures. We refer you to a recent editorial in The Windsor (Ontario) Star: ''A growing number of sick and tired Canadians are beginning to look to the US for ideas on how to improve our failing health-care system. But Kerry, inexplicably, is looking north for health care ideas. 3. Parlez-vous francais? Somehow I doubt it. And yet if you want to work for the Canadian government -- the country's largest employer -- chances are that you have to be bilingual. And the private sector is following suit. C'est dur, eh? 4. How do you like your free speech -- well chilled? Canada has no First Amendment and adheres to primitive British-style libel laws. Here is a hilarious definition of defamation la Canadienne, from the Media Libel website: ''A defamatory statement exists if the publication tends to lower the plaintiff's reputation in the estimation of those who are commonly referred to as 'right thinking' members of society. Allow me to reiterate my widely known position: Celine Dion is the greatest singer who ever lived. Just this year, the Canadian Parliament passed what the religious right has branded a ''Chill Bill, or ''The Bible as Hate Speech Bill, effectively preventing churches from using the Bible to preach against homosexuality. ''With the passage of Bill C-250, Canada has now embarked upon a course of criminalization of dissent, according to a statement released this spring by the Catholic Civil Rights League. Fine, you say. Enough gay-bashing by Bible-waving Christian loonies. But remember John Ashcroft's motto: Your rights are next. 5. It's the black hole of sports fandom. You would seriously consider leaving the home of North America's greatest baseball team -- ever -- and of North America's greatest football team, for . . . what? Canadian football is played on a field that's too long (that's why each team has 12 players), and there are only three downs. Huh? Fifty percent of Canada's Major League Baseball infrastructure -- les Montral Expos just decamped for Washington, D.C., because of audience indifference. Canada's one great sports treasure, professional hockey, isn't being played this year. You hadn't noticed? And you can't even name its national sport, can you? What if that question is on the citizenship application? 6. Have you heard the joke about the Canadian dollar? Not lately. Without putting too fine a point on this, Canadian currency has been laying a Euro-style smackdown on the US greenback. What this means to you: less purchasing power. Wait, there's more. You think you're living in a high-tax state right now? Hahahahahaha. 7. The biggest argument against immigrating to Canada is: You're going in the wrong direction! With all due respect to our northern neighbors, anyone who is anyone bolted years ago. Peter Jennings, Mike Myers, Joni Mitchell, Jim Carrey,
'Perilous Times': War of Words
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/books/review/07HITCHENS.html?8hpib=pagewanted=printposition= The New York Times November 7, 2004 'Perilous Times': War of Words By CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS PERILOUS TIMES Free Speech in Wartime, From the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism. By Geoffrey R. Stone. llustrated. 730 pp. W. W. Norton Company. $35. OWEVER seductively it may be phrased, the offer of an exchange of liberty for security has a totalitarian hook sticking out of its protectively colored bait. Societies that make the trade have very often ended up with neither liberty nor security. But on the other hand (as Fay Wray entitled her own memoir of monstrousness in New York) totalitarianism can present a much more menacing threat from without. I have heard serious people describe the reign of our pious present attorney general as fascistic. Given that jihadist armed forces could still be in our midst, that might be looking for fascism in all the wrong places. What this argument has long needed is the discipline of historical perspective, and Geoffrey R. Stone, a professor of law and former dean at the University of Chicago, has come forward at precisely the right moment with an imposing book that offers precisely that. In ''Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime, From the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism,'' he shows how the United States has balanced (and unbalanced) the scale of freedom versus the exigencies of self-defense. And he also demonstrates a kind of evolutionary learning curve, whereby the courts have distilled some of our dearly bought experience. America's first experiment with a national-security state was at once its most unambivalently disastrous and its shortest lived. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 were, to begin with, flagrantly partisan. The easiest proof of this is the exemption of the vice president from the list of official persons who could be calumniated, simply because the anti-Federalist Thomas Jefferson was at that time the holder of the office. They also vastly exaggerated the threat from revolutionary France and flatly negated the spirit and letter of the First Amendment. Editors were imprisoned; foreign-born friends of America like Thaddeus Kosciusko had already felt compelled to leave the country. So great was the eventual revulsion from this that, six and a half decades after the acts were repealed, President Lincoln had no choice but to read the most viperous editorials in the Democratic press, describing him as a demented tyrant bent upon a bloody war of self-aggrandizement. Stone's pages on this period are completely absorbing. He shows that Lincoln did imprison or fine the occasional editor, but with scant relish for the business, and that wartime censorship was so easily evaded as to be no censorship at all. The crisis came, rather, over conscription and the concomitant suspension of habeas corpus. Lincoln's secretary of state, William Seward, was widely quoted as having told the British minister: ''I can touch a bell on my right hand and order the arrest of a citizen in Ohio. I can touch the bell again and order the imprisonment of a citizen of New York, and no power on earth but that of the president can release them. Can the queen of England, in her dominions, say as much?'' This boastful inversion of the original purposes of the American Revolution may have been overstated for effect, but not by much. Lincoln did order nighttime arrests, and did ignore Chief Justice Roger B. Taney's ruling that a president had no power to deny habeas corpus. Taney's position is that the Constitution reserves such extreme measures only for the Congress. If a president wants to assume such powers, he cannot do so without at least resorting to the courts, which Lincoln steadily declined to do. Instead, he rather demagogically demanded to know why the law should force him to shoot ''a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wily agitator who induces him to desert.'' The cause celebre here became that of Clement Vallandigham, a leader of the Copperheads, northern Democrats sympathetic to the South, who spiritedly opposed both conscription and emancipation. He was arrested, then exiled from the Union. I have never seen it argued that this measure had any influence on the desertion rate (improbable in any case, given that the thought of the firing squad probably had a greater effect on the mind of the simple-minded soldier boy). The best that can be said is that Lincoln seems to have sensed the absurdity of his own logic, and regularly urged local commanders not to embarrass him by locking up people who merely uttered anti-Union sentiments. The next two wartime crises involved the killing of foreigners rather than Americans, and in both cases the ''loyalty'' of ethnic or national minorities was in question. During World War I, the persecution of German-Americans put H. L. Mencken in a permanent state of alienated
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:46:17AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Of course. What kind of question is that? Regardless of voting fraud, about half of US has voted for four more years of the same. Guilty. Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) Huh? What was the question, again? -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgpAkamuQfxSf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Kerry Kept Money Coming With the Internet as His ATM
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/campaign/06internet.html?pagewanted=printposition= The New York Times November 6, 2004 FUND-RAISING Kerry Kept Money Coming With the Internet as His ATM By GLEN JUSTICE WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - The power of the Internet in this year's election can be summed up in the story of Sam Warren, an Alabama voter who had never made a political contribution before but found himself donating 21 times to Senator John Kerry - all without opening his checkbook. Mr. Warren gave when the senator won the Super Tuesday primaries. He gave when the campaign sent him an e-mail message. He gave during the Democratic convention. By Election Day, Mr. Warren had given almost $2,000. I surprised even myself, he said. It's so easy to do. All you do is click-click with a Visa card. The emergence of the Internet as a major fund-raising tool is arguably the largest single change to the campaign finance system to come from this year's presidential race, allowing thousands of contributors like Mr. Warren to react instantly to campaign events as they happen. Although Howard Dean set the pace during the primaries, raising roughly $20 million, no one capitalized more on Internet fund-raising than Mr. Kerry. With a sophisticated marketing effort to keep people clicking, he emerged as the largest online fund-raiser in politics, bringing in about $82 million over the Internet - more than the $50 million Al Gore raised from all individual contributors in 2000. The Bush campaign, which used its Internet site primarily to organize voters, raised about $14 million online. The Internet helped Mr. Kerry cut President Bush's financial lead substantially. Mr. Bush raised about $273 million, while Mr. Kerry raised about $249 million. The amount Mr. Kerry raised online virtually ensures that few presidential and Congressional campaigns will develop in the future without the Internet in mind. This is arguably the most powerful tool for political engagement we've ever seen, said Simon Rosenthal, president of the New Democratic Network. It made it easier for the average citizen to participate in politics. Every moment they interact with the campaign can be a direct-response moment. They can watch a speech on TV, get motivated and give money. And they did. Though there is no precise tally of how many people gave to the candidates over the Internet, the amount of cash from people giving less than $200 increased fourfold from 2000, according to the Campaign Finance Institute, which studies presidential financing. Online fund-raising spread quickly, allowing candidates, parties and advocacy groups a low-cost supplement to big-donor fund-raising. The Internet pioneer MoveOn.org, which advocated Mr. Bush's defeat, raised millions. At the popular liberal Web log Daily Kos, its founder, Markos Moulitsas, directed more than $750,000 to the Democratic party and candidates from 6,500 contributors. Just a mention on the blog was worth thousands to a campaign. Even Amazon.com got involved, offering links that raised $300,000 for presidential candidates. We were happy to make it as easy for people to contribute as it is to buy the latest Harry Potter book, the company said in a letter to customers. It was just four years ago that Senator John McCain made headlines when he raised more than $1 million online after winning the New Hampshire primary. This year, Dr. Dean created his entire campaign around the Internet, relying on it for fund-raising and organization and pioneering many of the techniques that have become standard practice. The campaign posted its fund-raising goals, long a taboo in the political world, and sent a relentless stream of fund-raising e-mail messages, liberally sharing information about why it needed the money and what it would pay for. And it took chances. The Dean campaign really experimented a lot, said Nicco Mele, the campaign's Webmaster. The Kerry campaign doesn't have that approach. Mr. Kerry's campaign came late to online fund-raising. He raised just $1.2 million in 2003, with an Internet team in the basement of a Washington townhouse. But the campaign awoke to the possibilities when Dr. Dean's fund-raising began to soar. Josh Ross, a 32-year-old former Republican with a Silicon Valley background, came aboard in late November 2003 to marshal the effort, but it was a period when Mr. Kerry was sagging in the polls and fund-raising had slowed. Josh was building a car, but he didn't have a whole lot of gas, said David Thorne, Mr. Kerry's longtime friend and former brother-in-law, who was instrumental in creating the campaign's Internet program. The situation turned when Mr. Kerry won in Iowa. The Internet team persuaded campaign leaders to insert a mention of the Web site in the victory speech. Mr. Thorne made a late-night run to Kinko's to create a JohnKerry.com placard for the lectern. When the candidate mentioned the site, hits shot skyward. There were never any
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:46:17 -0500, Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In other words, he won because some hillbilly was afraid that the guy at the local 7-11 was going to blow up his chicked farm. Those of us living close enough to Ground Zero to smell it back in those days are apprarently less than convinced. As the article notes, GWB *improved* his showing in NY over the 2000 election. Are you implying that the US won't be attacked again? I could follow your ad-hominem attack with one about mincing homosexuals, but we both know that singlularity of voters on either side is incorrect, and does nothing to forward the discussion. So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) Of course it does. That's what a republic is. But who's going to 'indict' us? The UN? Maybe after we finish the trials for their self-dealing on the 'Oil for Food' program (as Orwellian a title as the Patriot Act had). -- Pete Capelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.capelli.org PGP Key ID:0x829263B6 Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: No, Canada!
Fair enough. Canada is a role model for the US, as is the US for the world: nobody is wanted unless they are willing to pay for the mistakes and messes the locals have made, or best, work for starvation wages, usually off the books, long the prime source of penal-grade labor in the Echelon nations, not to say the, spit, Western and Eastern cultures -- out-sourcing has always been first in line right at home: wives, kids and the invisible caste-classes who swab your puke and dump your garbage and bail you out of the drunk tank. Contamination by settlement of North America (and man-woman marriage): pay for it, new immigrants (wives and kids), with cheap labor and keeping your thoughts very, very quiet, and don't bitch about master's eccentricities about sex. The first New World, as Old, settlers set these conditions for the natives and for anybody who came afterwards. That's how you succeed in the New Worlds, behave like Calvinist cum Libertarian cum Roman cum Roman Church pretend aristocrats: if you dont'have it you don't deserve it, but you can always steal it the legal way, stock market and tithe basket, praise Allah for his valorizing wealth as salvation. But, more of the defense budget goes for clean-up of its messes in the US than for military health-care and benefits (overseas it has hardly begun). The clean-up corporations are mostly the same ones which made the messes (this is the pattern since the Revolutionary War), and they are not doing the job worth a shit, overruns and performance failures as bad as for unworkable but richly bragged-about armaments. If the bitching about contamination gets too loud, why start another war. The DC-area is one of the most contaminated parts of the US due to the plethora of toxic-puking mil installations. One of the worst is under American University and surrounding neighborhoods, across Nebraska Avenue from the headquarters of Homeland Security, itself once home of the military's oldest comsec unit. As sleazy Hitchens and slews of other suck-ups of the rich and powerful have demonstrated, especially those predating from Canada: defend and flatter and amuse the privileged of the US-supremacist model of the New World as if the Old in new clothing, and you'll do quite well. But do not engage in dissent or your product won't move and your wise ass will be banished -- thanks to the scoundrels' patriotism embedded in the capitalist regime since day one.
Re: This Memorable Day
The US made a bundle from WW1 and WW2 warfare, in both cases being rescued from an economic slump, and some have argued the US delayed sending troops as long as possible to extend the demand for supplies, supplies which appeared to always be insufficient but enough to keep the warring parties going at it. To be sure, the US Civil War provided the same beneficence to its overseas exploiters, not to say domestic entrpreneurs, not to say hordes of today's reenactors. Historians have noted that Northern generals in particular worked hard to avoid battle while begging for more troops and supplies. Shrewd commentators write there could have been Southern-general complicity in this paradic churning before it got out of hand due to Lincoln demanding action to keep his comfy future -- kapow! went the prez to his virgins. It is a truism that power in leaders is enlarged during wartime, no matter their ideology, so it is a surefire way to boost flagging support (60 million can be that DUMB). And the more humans slaughtered the greater the support as each homeland, praise Allah's cloven hooves, and seeks revenge for the loss of its prime beef, and if all goes well, the fighting never comes home to roost in hilltop mansions, damn those paraplegics who won't parade their grotesqueries: axe their meds. Red poppies, how do they bloom in November, remember Fallujah. Halls of Montezuma, Shores of Tripoli, yadda.
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
-- John Young wrote: Commie is the term used here like is nazi used elsewhere as the most fearsome if thoughtless epithet. Nazi here is a term of endearment, and also admirable role model by some. Calling someone both is not allowed, check the FAQ under impurity. I routinely call people like you nazi-commies. As George Orwell observed, anyone who thinks there is a significant difference between nazis and commies is in favor of one or the other. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tcPPLhn9aMTaLb/hq3C0TK4TWGyDiUmRgFC+48C2 4sa/dBFoKxqt/B8oRTgvooxp3PmvXeSL3LjqpFI+W ___ $0 Web Hosting with up to 120MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer 10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more. Signup at www.doteasy.com
RE: No, Canada!
Wow. What kind of fucking idiot wrote this thing? A piece like this can actually get published? This is the biggest set of arguments I've seen yet for moving TO Canada! BTW: I always thought that Economic Immigration was an excellent ideait siphoned off tons of Hong Kong millionares before the PRC took over. The US should have been doing it in addition to the non-Express route. -TD From: R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: No, Canada! Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:57:22 -0500 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2004/11/06/no_canada?mode=PF The Boston Globe THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING No, Canada! You don't want to go there By Alex Beam, Globe Staff | November 6, 2004 You have probably heard the idle chatter: ''I'm thinking of moving to Canada. You may have received the JPEG Sent 'Round the World, labeling the northern part of North America -- the right-thinking part, as liberals would have it -- as the United States of Canada, and the pro-Bush leaning ''red US states as Jesusland. It sounds so alluring. Good beer. Cheap Viagra. Hardly any crime. Friendly, if somewhat ineffectual, people. Terrific, if underappreciated, novelists. (This means you, Rohinton Mistry.) Secure borders, courtesy of the US Department of Defense. But before you pack, consider this: There are plenty of reasons not to move to Canada. Let me count the ways. 1. They don't really want you. Canada is full of losers like you. If you're really rich, or a brain surgeon, maybe. But if you are, say, a newspaper reporter, be prepared to wait at least a year just to live there legally, and several more years to become a citizen. If you have some special qualifications, like a PhD, plus a lot of work experience, and if you are under 50, you have a better chance of crashing the gates of Snow Mexico. Or if you're loaded. That's right. If you have a net worth of $800,000 Canadian or more, and are willing to invest $400,000 of it in Canada, come on in! And you thought George Bush's America was a plutocracy. . . . Think again. 2. Speaking of brain surgery -- have you tried Buffalo? Here is what John Kerry didn't tell you: The problem with free, single-payer health care is that you get what you pay for. Even the Canadians acknowledge that their health system is in crisis. (Sound familiar?) They speak about the inequities of their two-tiered system, where publicly funded patients wait weeks, if not months, to consult specialists or have routine surgery, while private patients get quick service. In fact, it's a three-tiered system. The very well-to-do travel to the United States for some procedures. We refer you to a recent editorial in The Windsor (Ontario) Star: ''A growing number of sick and tired Canadians are beginning to look to the US for ideas on how to improve our failing health-care system. But Kerry, inexplicably, is looking north for health care ideas. 3. Parlez-vous francais? Somehow I doubt it. And yet if you want to work for the Canadian government -- the country's largest employer -- chances are that you have to be bilingual. And the private sector is following suit. C'est dur, eh? 4. How do you like your free speech -- well chilled? Canada has no First Amendment and adheres to primitive British-style libel laws. Here is a hilarious definition of defamation la Canadienne, from the Media Libel website: ''A defamatory statement exists if the publication tends to lower the plaintiff's reputation in the estimation of those who are commonly referred to as 'right thinking' members of society. Allow me to reiterate my widely known position: Celine Dion is the greatest singer who ever lived. Just this year, the Canadian Parliament passed what the religious right has branded a ''Chill Bill, or ''The Bible as Hate Speech Bill, effectively preventing churches from using the Bible to preach against homosexuality. ''With the passage of Bill C-250, Canada has now embarked upon a course of criminalization of dissent, according to a statement released this spring by the Catholic Civil Rights League. Fine, you say. Enough gay-bashing by Bible-waving Christian loonies. But remember John Ashcroft's motto: Your rights are next. 5. It's the black hole of sports fandom. You would seriously consider leaving the home of North America's greatest baseball team -- ever -- and of North America's greatest football team, for . . . what? Canadian football is played on a field that's too long (that's why each team has 12 players), and there are only three downs. Huh? Fifty percent of Canada's Major League Baseball infrastructure -- les Montral Expos just decamped for Washington, D.C., because of audience indifference. Canada's one great sports treasure, professional hockey, isn't being played this year. You hadn't noticed? And you can't even name its national sport, can you? What if that question is on the citizenship application? 6. Have you heard the joke about the Canadian dollar? Not lately. Without
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On 2004-11-06T16:39:41+0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:46:17AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Of course. What kind of question is that? Regardless of voting fraud, about half of US has voted for four more years of the same. Guilty. Not true. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/ [Curtis] Gans puts the total turnout at nearly 120 million people. That represents just under 60% of eligible voters... 120m * 100%/60% = 200 million eligible voters (The U.S. population according to census.gov was 290,809,777 as of 2003-07-01 http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/ Bush Vote: 59,459,765 Let's generously round that up to 65 million. 65m/200m = 32.5% of eligible voters voted for Bush 65m/290.8m = 22.4% of the U.S. population voted for Bush I can't find an accurate number of registered voters, but one article suggests 15% of registered voters don't vote. That means there are probably around 141m registered voters. Bush didn't even win majority support from /those/. 65m/141m = 46% of registered voters voted for Bush -- The old must give way to the new, falsehood must become exposed by truth, and truth, though fought, always in the end prevails. -- L. Ron Hubbard
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:25:19 +, Justin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true. much busywork math deleted Saddam had 100% turnout, and won 100% of the vote. Does that make his election more legitimate to you? -- Pete Capelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.capelli.org PGP Key ID:0x829263B6 Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Landlside maps
For the map-obsessed, this one shows the depth of support for President Feckless in the global community. Pretty goddam impressive I'd say. I takes true flair to blow off so many former clients and fair weather friends in so short a time. http://www.warrenkinsella.com/images/worldmap.jpg And oh yes, for the benefit of Mr. Bean at the Boston Globe, Frank Gehry got his Canadian passport back three or four years ago. Prescient I'd say; visionary even.
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 09:31:24AM -0800, James Donald wrote: I routinely call people like you nazi-commies. How novel and interesting. Cut the rhetoric, get on with the program. Cypherpunks write code. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgpJ6yWZU03Sk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Ultra-Soft Towels starting at $2.99
Towels starting at $2.99. Wash cloths, hand towels, bath towels, etc. Visit here If you no longer wish to receive these messages, please send a blank email hereOR send a postal mail to: 1947 S Wadsworth Blvd #19, Lakewood, CO 80227-2434
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 06:25:19PM +, Justin wrote: Not true. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/ [Curtis] Gans puts the total turnout at nearly 120 million people. That represents just under 60% of eligible voters... You didn't vote against a candidate, you tacitly accept whatever other voters decide. For you. There isn't none of the above option, unfortunately. 120m * 100%/60% = 200 million eligible voters (The U.S. population according to census.gov was 290,809,777 as of 2003-07-01 http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/ Bush Vote: 59,459,765 Let's generously round that up to 65 million. 65m/200m = 32.5% of eligible voters voted for Bush 65m/290.8m = 22.4% of the U.S. population voted for Bush I can't find an accurate number of registered voters, but one article suggests 15% of registered voters don't vote. That means there are probably around 141m registered voters. Bush didn't even win majority support from /those/. 65m/141m = 46% of registered voters voted for Bush Don't mince numbers. About half of those who could and could be bothered to vote voted for more of the same. At least that's how the rest of the world is going to see it. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgpr5KdgdTyK1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Stop the Porn. Stop Spam.
---Click Stop Spam Once and for all! Eliminates porn too! Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email. Copy and paste this link into your browser - mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm Computer Technologies 848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107 chlorophyllharvardprovocativeproofreadbootesbellebrmontmartrealleletutorialsuppositionmaime.garboretumbrforgetfulczarhorticulturepeachtreedishevelintersectbrfrontagemalefactorGkEczmhorjByjCmknDojCoxiUifirecrackerimperativebrdwarfpersistdegascryptogramcoshtributecockroachbrfelicitousamperedialysisinvoicerecompenserupturebrbondagesubjectivityknightsbridgefrankfurtermarioncombustible /font/p stop.gif
Stop the Porn. Stop Spam.
---Click Stop Spam Once and for all! Eliminates porn too! Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email. Copy and paste this link into your browser - mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm Computer Technologies 848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107 hoodlumbermenbodiedorphanagescottcottonbrloosestrifedecathlonparliamentarybiminihoopmethodismtreadmillbrsniggerconstantmethodistbolsterspringboardcrupperbrwithtopicGkEecfowzmojqtlBblCompDqlCqzkUidefraudapprenticebrrarefydisputantfactorhangmenalginateinventorybookletbrjuliusprymcknightjuicyculturecurricularbrarylheadphonepostmenathenseggplantrecherche /font/p stop.gif
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Justin wrote: On 2004-11-06T16:39:41+0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:46:17AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Of course. What kind of question is that? Regardless of voting fraud, about half of US has voted for four more years of the same. Guilty. Not true. The fact is that those who did not vote effectively voted for Shrub. You are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem. Inaction is not good enough. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF An ill wind is stalking while evil stars whir and all the gold apples go bad to the core S. Plath, Temper of Time
RE: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Tyler Durden wrote: In other words, he won because some hillbilly was afraid that the guy at the local 7-11 was going to blow up his chicked farm. Precisely. So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) Complicit? Thats *technically* correct, but not nearly strong enough. -TD -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF An ill wind is stalking while evil stars whir and all the gold apples go bad to the core S. Plath, Temper of Time
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
J.A. Terranson wrote: The fact is that those who did not vote effectively voted for Shrub. You are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem. Inaction is not good enough. This would only be true if the President were elected by popular vote. In states where one candidate had a huge majority, the results would not have been changed. Also, voting is in some sense political manipulation to blame the population for the actions of their government. Everyone who votes is a co-conspirator, and the argument is made that those who don't vote have no right to dissent. Any government that requires that I vote, or the torture and war crimes are my fault, is broken to start with. The fundamental definition of Democracy is still Your neighbors tell you what to do. I don't tolerate my neighbors telling me what to do, particularly my neighbors in the Confederacy, which we should have let keep their Negro guest-workers and drop out of the union when the opportunity presented itself. Now they outnumber us, and we are paying for it. The only government I need is Leave me alone, or face serious consequences. Similarly, I leave others alone. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Broward machines count backward
It sounds suspiciously like an int16 issue.
32K is close enough to 32767 after which a 16 bit integer goes negative
when incremented. Which is odd because it should roll over, not count
backwards.
perhaps they did something like this:
note the use of abs on reporting.
int16 votes[MAX_CANDIDATES];
void add_a_vote(uint8 candidate)
{
if (candidateMAX_CANDIDATES) return;
votes[candidate]++;
}
void report(void)
{
int i;
for (i=0; iMAX_CANDIDATES; i++)
{
printf(Candidate %s got %d votes\n,candidates[i],abs(votes[i]));
}
}
--Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos---
+ ^ + :Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\
\|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\
--*--:and our people, and neither do we. -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/
/|\ : \|/
+ v + :War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President.
-
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, R.A. Hettinga wrote:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2004/11/05/a29a_BROWVOTE_1105.html
Palm Beach Post
Broward machines count backward
By Eliot Kleinberg
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 05, 2004
FORT LAUDERDALE - It had to happen. Things were just going too smoothly.
Early Thursday, as Broward County elections officials wrapped up after a
long day of canvassing votes, something unusual caught their eye. Tallies
should go up as more votes are counted. That's simple math. But in some
races, the numbers had gone . . . down.
Officials found the software used in Broward can handle only 32,000 votes
per precinct. After that, the system starts counting backward.
Re: No, Canada!
At 11:42 AM -0800 11/6/04, John Young wrote: capitalist There you go, speaking marxist again... ;-) Cheers, RAH Capitalism is totalitarian for economics... -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At 6:25 PM + 11/6/04, Justin wrote: 65m/141m = 46% of registered voters voted for Bush Of course, you can invert the math and say the same about Kerry, plus Bush's 3-something million margin, I'm afraid. Hell, Rush said exactly the same thing on Friday. :-). Numerology doesn't win elections, I'm afraid. Remember, boys and girls, government itself is the not-so-polite fiction that the highwayman is acting in our best interest at all times if we pay him enough to leave us, individually, alone. So, as Brooks indirectly proves, rather than blathering here, or elsewhere, about values, or equality, or fairness, or justice, or other lofty nonsense, electoral or otherwise, look at how well a given *culture* and its implicit force-control mechanism, does *economically* for its citizenry (a parasite doesn't kill its own host, and all that...), besides just being able to kill more and better soldiers on the other side of the battlefield is actually putting the cart before the horse. The fact that increasing personal liberty results in such higher per-capita income, and thus the ability to project force than reducing liberty does isn't necessarily the same level of metaphysical mystery as the fact that some kinds of mathematics predict reality, but it's close enough for, heh, government work. Someday, hopefully, financial cryptography will reduce transaction costs by actually *increasing* privacy (see math and reality, liberty and income, above), the *economic* rationale for force-monopoly will go away, and *then* we can all exhume Lysander Spooner, prop him up, and talk about constitutions of no authority, or whatever. Cheers, RAH -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBQY1vN8PxH8jf3ohaEQKyGACbB6XlMBht53x48ugBvJQqOUJ/4P8AnRlX 4M/JvqrHdU9LvnTlrEilGzoK =D4M9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
At 8:08 PM +0100 11/6/04, Eugen Leitl wrote: Cypherpunks write code. Right. That's it. Wanna write me a bearer mint? For free? ;-) Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
At 9:31 AM -0800 11/6/04, James Donald wrote: As George Orwell observed, anyone who thinks there is a significant difference between nazis and commies is in favor of one or the other. I'm going to have hunt that one up for my .sig file. Thank you. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
Fun bits to read, somewhat related to Owell and the perceived notional differences between various... extremists. http://www.campusprogram.com/reference/en/wikipedia/f/fa/fascism.html http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/opinion/essays/storgaard1.html http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm Certainly one could infer from reading Politics and the English Language that Orwell could've or would've thought such a thing. If anyone finds it before I do, post a link, will ya? CK On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:38:21 -0500, R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 9:31 AM -0800 11/6/04, James Donald wrote: As George Orwell observed, anyone who thinks there is a significant difference between nazis and commies is in favor of one or the other. I'm going to have hunt that one up for my .sig file. Thank you. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/07/do0704.xml The Telegraph Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush By Mark Steyn (Filed: 07/11/2004) The big question after Tuesday was: will it just be more of the same in George W Bush's second term, or will there be a change of tone? And apparently it's the latter. The great European thinkers have decided that instead of doing another four years of lame Bush-is-a-moron cracks they're going to do four years of lame Americans-are-morons cracks. Inaugurating the new second-term outreach was Brian Reade in the Daily Mirror, who attributed the President's victory to: The self-righteous, gun-totin', military-lovin', sister-marryin', abortion-hatin', gay-loathin', foreigner-despisin', non-passport-ownin' rednecks, who believe God gave America the biggest dick in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land 'free and strong'. Well, that's certainly why I supported Bush, but I'm not sure it entirely accounts for the other 59,459,765. Forty five per cent of Hispanics voted for the President, as did 25 per cent of Jews, and 23 per cent of gays. And this coalition of common-or-garden rednecks, Hispanic rednecks, sinister Zionist rednecks, and lesbian rednecks who enjoy hitting on their gay-loathin' sisters expanded its share of the vote across the entire country - not just in the Bush states but in the Kerry states, too. In all but six states, the Republican vote went up: the urinating rednecks have increased their number not just in Texas and Mississippi but in Massachusetts and California, both of which have Republican governors. You can drive from coast to coast across the middle of the country and never pass through a single county that voted for John Kerry: it's one continuous cascade of self-righteous urine from sea to shining sea. States that were swing states in 2000 - West Virginia, Arkansas - are now solidly Republican, and once solidly Democrat states - Iowa, Wisconsin - are now swingers. The redneck states push hard up against the Canadian border, where if your neck's red it's frostbite. Bush's incontinent rednecks are everywhere: they're so numerous they're running out of sisters to bunk up with. Who exactly is being self-righteous here? In Britain and Europe, there seem to be two principal strains of Bush-loathing. First, the guys who say, if you disagree with me, you must be an idiot - as in the Mirror headline How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB? Second, the guys who say, if you disagree with me, you must be a Nazi - as in Oliver James, who told The Guardian: I was too depressed to even speak this morning. I thought of my late mother, who read Mein Kampf when it came out in the 1930s [sic] and thought, 'Why doesn't anyone see where this is leading?' Mr James is a clinical psychologist. If smug Europeans are going to coast on moron-Fascist sneers indefinitely, they'll be dooming themselves to ever more depressing mornings-after in the 2006 midterms, the 2008 presidential election, 2010, and beyond: America's resistance to the conventional wisdom of the rest of the developed world is likely to intensify in the years ahead. This widening gap is already a point of pride to the likes of B J Kelly of Killiney, who made the following observation on Friday's letters page in The Irish Times: Here in the EU we objected recently to high office for a man who professed the belief that abortion and gay marriages are essentially evil. Over in the US such an outlook could have won him the presidency. I'm not sure who he means by we. As with most decisions taken in the corridors of Europower, the views of Killiney and Knokke and Krakow didn't come into it one way or the other. B J Kelly is referring to Rocco Buttiglione, the mooted European commissioner whose views on homosexuality, single parenthood, etc would have been utterly unremarkable for an Italian Catholic 30 years ago. Now Europe's secular elite has decided they're beyond the pale and such a man should have no place in public life. And B J Kelly sees this as evidence of how much more enlightened Europe is than America. That's fine. But what happens if the European elite should decide a whole lot of other stuff is beyond the pale, too, some of it that B J Kelly is quite partial to? In affirming the traditional definition of marriage in 11 state referenda, from darkest Mississippi to progressive enlightened Kerry-supporting Oregon, the American people were not expressing their gay-loathin' , so much as declining to go the Kelly route and have their betters tell them what they can think. They're not going to have marriage redefined by four Massachusetts judges and a couple of activist mayors. That doesn't make them Bush theo-zombies marching in lockstep to the gay lynching, just freeborn citizens asserting their right to dissent from today's established church - the stifling coercive theology of political correctness enforced by a
Re: Your source code, for sale
Enzo Michelangeli writes: In the world of international trade, where mutual distrust between buyer and seller is often the rule and there is no central authority to enforce the law, this is traditionally achieved by interposing not less than three trusted third parties: the shipping line, the opening bank and the negotiating bank. Interesting. In the e-gold case, both parties have the same bank, e-gold ltd. The corresponding protocol would be for the buyer to instruct e-gold to set aside some money which would go to the seller once the seller supplied a certain receipt. That receipt would be an email return receipt showing that the seller had sent the buyer the content with hash so-and-so, using a cryptographic email return-receipt protocol. This is to mix up banking and payment systems. Enzo's description shows banks doing banking - lending money on paper that eventually pays a rate of return. In contrast, in the DGC or digital gold currency world, the issuers of gold like e-gold are payment systems and not banks. The distinction is that a payment system does not issue credit. So, in the e-gold scenario, there would need to be similar third parties independent of the payment system to provide the credit moving in the reverse direction to the goods. In the end it would be much like Enzo's example, with a third party with the seller, a third party with the buyer, and one or two third parties who are dealing the physical goods. There have been some thoughts in the direction of credit creation in the gold community, but nothing of any sustainability has occurred as yet. iang
More Evidence The Vote Was Rigged
http://www.rense.com/general59/rig.htm More Evidence The Vote Was Rigged From Wayne Nash 11-5-4 I don't want rain on the parade but I am getting quite a few emails from various sources citing possible irregularities with the voting process. So, I did a little research myself on the net to see what I could find. As a political scientist I could not resist. Regardless of the veracity of any claim to possible irregularities I suggest that this question of legitimacy of the process needs to be addressed if everyone casting their vote is to feel that their vote is being properly counted. No one can feel disenfranchised in a real democracy. Otherwise, you end up with a dictatorship and not a democracy at all. Unless BOTH sides feel the system is verifiable then you may end up with a banana republic 'democracy'. This is not question of who won the election. It is a matter of much greater importance; the legitimacy of the democratic process itself. Here are a couple of sites which address the issue: 1. http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/ 2. http://www.electoral-vote.com/ On this last web site I found this interesting bit of information: Various people sent me mail saying that it is awfully fishy that the exit polls and final results were substantially different in some places. I hope someone will follow this up and actually do a careful analysis. Does anyone know of a Website containing all the exit poll data? If we go to computerized voting without a paper trail and the machines can be set up to cheat, that is the end of our democracy. Switching 5 votes per machine is probably all it would take to throw an election and nobody would ever see it unless someone compares the computer totals and exit polls. I am still very concerned about the remark of Walden O'Dell a Republican fund raiser and CEO of Diebold, which makes voting machines saying he would deliver Ohio for President Bush. Someone (not me) should look into this carefully. The major newspapers actually recounted all the votes in Florida last time. Maybe this year's project should be looking at the exit polls. If there are descrepancies between the exit polls and the final results in touch-screen counties but not in paper-ballot counties, that would be a signal. At the very least it could be a good masters thesis for a political science student. The Open voting consortium is a group addressing the subject of verifiable voting. Could there be a possible problem here? Let's see... * In states where there were paper ballots the results exactly matched the exit polls. * In states where there were only electronic 'touch-screen' paperless voting machines Bush showed an inexplicable 5-8 point or more difference from the polls, contradicting otherwise accurate exit polls. * The software used in these voting machines is so sophisticated that you can't even check out the programming because it disappears leaving nothing to verify, no source code, no nothing. Below are 3 articles explaining how these E-voting programs work. The man who published these articles is apparently an expert on this E-voting subject and a computer scientist. Article 1 http://www.southbaymobilization.org/newsroom/ articles/04.0303.ADeafeningSilence_article.htm Article 2 http://www.southbaymobilization.org/newsroom/ articles/04.0618.SecretAgentPrograms_article.htm Article 3 http://www.southbaymobilization.org/newsroom/ articles/04.0701.EVoting_TheNewCloseUpMagic_article.htm Another site takes the subject seriously... http://www.rense.com/general59/steI.HTM Highlight: * SoCalDem has done a statistical analysis... ...on several swing states, and EVERY STATE that has EVoting but no paper trails has an unexplained advantage for Bush of around +5% when comparing exit polls to actual results. * In EVERY STATE that has paper audit trails on their EVoting, the exit poll results match the actual results reported within the margin of error. * Analysis of the polling data vs actual data and voting systems supports the hypothesis that evoting may be to blame in the discrepancies. * The media was a bit taken aback that the results didn't match the exit polls AT ALL. Most of the commentators were scratching their head in disbelief at the results. The media has gracefully claimed they just got it wrong. Some examples? WISCONSIN: Kerry leads Female voters by 7%, Bush leads male voters by 7%. Male vs. Female voter turnout is 47% M, 53% F. That means Kerry statistically has a 7% edge in exit polling in Wisconsin. Actual results however show Bush ahead by 1%, an unexplained difference of 8%. NEVADA: Kerry leads in the exit polls by a clear margin, but is still behind in the reported results. This state is even closer. Actual is just 1% favor of Bush. Exit polls show Kerry with a wider margin. Women favored Kerry by 8% here out of 52% of total voters. Men favored Bush by just 6% out of 48% of total voters. Actual reported results don't match exit
Observable Elections
http://www.infosecwriters.com/hhworld/hh9/voting.txt Hitchhiker's World (Issue #9) http://www.infosecwriters.com/hhworld/ Observable Elections Vipul Ved Prakash [EMAIL PROTECTED] November 2004 This is an interesting time for electronic voting. India, the largest democracy in the world, went completely paper- free for its general elections earlier this year. For the first time, some 387 million people expressed their electoral right electronically. Despite initial concerns about security and correctness of the system, the election process was a smashing success. Over a million electronic voting machines (EVMs) were deployed, 8000 metric tonnes of paper saved[1] and the results made public within few hours of the final vote. Given the quarrelsome and heavily litigated nature of Indian democracy, a lot of us were expecting post-election drama, but only a few, if any, fingers were found pointing. Things didn't fare so well in the United States. The Dieobold electronic machines, slated for use in many states for the November 2004 Federal elections, turned out to have rather large security holes. Cryptography experts, Avi Rubin et al, did a formal analysis of the machines and found that they could be subverted to introduce votes that were never casted[2]. An independent government-backed analysis confirmed this[3] and concluded that the Diebold voting system as implemented in policy, procedure, and technology, is at a high risk of compromise. It is clear, even to a cursory observer, that Diebold systems are sloppily designed, never mind the sloppiness is a function of incompetence or intent. The recent controversy from the Black Box Voting security advisory titled the Diebold GEMS central tabulator contains a stunning security hole[4] has added to the confusion. It claims that a code entered at a remote location can replace the real vote count with a fabricated one. This security hole, discovered last year, is still not fixed says the advisory. In response, Diebold claims that this is possible, but only in debug mode, which does little to make people confortable. What is disturbing to me as a technologist is the burgeoning public opinion that electronics is an unviable medium for conducting the serious business of elections. Over the last year I've seen numerous formal reports and articles in popular press[5] equating the failures of Diebold systems with the untenability of electronic voting. This is rather silly. Diebold systems are not only poorly engineered, they are also seriously flawed in design. Even if they were immaculately bug-free, they are so far from what electronic voting systems should be, that I have trouble categorizing them as voting systems. Electronic counters is more accurate. Various augmentations have been proposed to Diebold systems; most revolve around parallel paper trails. Verified Voting[6] for example proposes that a vote be printed based on the voter's touch-screen selection, so the voter can touch, feel and verify their vote before casting it into a traditional ballet box. These votes would then be processed with an OCR type machine to compute a cumulative result and the physical votes would be saved so an independent party can verify the electronic result at a latter date. This is a reasonable tradeoff -- after all integrity of elections is way more important than saving trees and time. While this is the best recommendation for the upcoming elections, it subtly promotes the primacy of paper and distrust in electrons. We know that paper elections are no more secure. The history of vote tampering in paper based elections is quite illustrious (I'll simply refer the gentle reader to [7]) and the reason electronics was considered in the first place was to eliminate such tampering. Verified Voting recommends that count of the physical votes is to be considered superior than that of the electronic counterparts in case of a difference. What happens if the process of this count is tampered using traditional methods? We are back to square one. The central point that I want to get across in this paper is that the promise of electronic voting is not merely a quicker, slightly more secure and ecologically enlightened replacement for paper elections. Electronic voting, if implemented correctly, could be a major qualitative leap, not only changing the way in which we approach democratic elections, but also the the way in which we expect a democratic government to function. Cryptographic Integrity I want to draw attention to the work done by cryptographic community in the last 20 years
Aloha Casino Online!
Aloha! Enjoy island style entertainment with these hot new promotional offers: $300 match deposit bonus - bonus code X3DAW at casino's cashier. $10 free, no deposit necessary - bonus code FR1EE at casino's cashier. Vacation at Aloha Casino! 50 amazing games - 24/7 customer support - SafeBet certification Visit: http://www.alohacasino.biz Mahalo, Billy Bob No thanks: http://www.alohacasino.biz/u/
Supreme Court Issues
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/07/politics/07court.html?partner=ALTAVISTA1pagewanted=print We're going to get some extremist anti-abortion, pro-internment, anti-1A, anti-4A, anti-5A, anti-14A, right-wing wacko. Imagine Ashcroft as Chief Justice. I really hope I'm wrong. What happens when the Chief Justice is dead? Can someone close to him (like his secretary) pull the strings on his corpose and send in his votes indefinitely, without his being in attendance during the conferences, receiving case briefs from his law clerks, or attending oral arguments? In the two weeks that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, 80, has been treated for a serious form of thyroid cancer, life at the court has proceeded without a sense of crisis. The judicial function is shared by eight other people, with Justice John Paul Stevens, the senior associate justice, presiding over courtroom sessions and the justices' private conferences. The administrative tasks are carried out, as they usually are under the chief justice's direction, by his administrative assistant, Sally M. Rider, a former federal prosecutor and State Department lawyer. These arrangements can continue almost indefinitely. Nonetheless, as it has become evident that Chief Justice Rehnquist will not be returning soon, a sense of sadness and uncertainty has spread throughout the court and into the wider community of federal judges who have received no more information than the general public about the chief justice's condition and prospects. Judges have refrained from calling either Chief Justice Rehnquist or Ms. Rider. I don't have the nerve, one judge who has worked closely with the chief justice said Friday. The vibes I get just aren't good. A judge who did call the chief justice's chambers in anticipation of a visit to Washington was steered away from visiting his home in Arlington, Va. The justices have sent notes, but it is not clear whether any have seen or even talked to him. Information from official channels has been minimal. The court's press office would not say whether the chief justice was present for the justices' regular Friday morning conference, at which they review new cases and decide which to grant. (He was not.) Nor would the press office say whether, if he did not attend, he sent in his votes. (He did.) The chief justice, it appears, has functioned as his own press officer. Surely a professional would have cautioned him, on the day it was announced that he had just undergone a tracheotomy, against making a public promise to be back at work in a week. Every cancer specialist whom reporters consulted after the announcement found that prediction highly implausible. And when the chief justice found on Monday that he could not fulfill the promise, he subtly but unmistakably indicated that the error had been his own and not his doctors': According to my doctors, my plan to return to the office today was too optimistic. Chief Justice Rehnquist's statement on Monday said that he was receiving radiation and chemotherapy on an outpatient basis. Both the aggressive treatment and the observations of those who have seen him in recent weeks suggest that the disease is advanced and rapidly progressing. A judge who attended a meeting with him in late September said the chief justice looked well and spoke without the hoarseness that was apparent by the time the court's new term began Oct. 4; a spreading thyroid tumor can impinge on the nerves that control the vocal cords. By mid-October, one court employee who saw the chief justice in his street clothes was struck by his frailty. That robe can hide a lot, this employee said. The court will hear arguments in this coming week and then again in the two weeks following the Thanksgiving weekend. It will then go on recess until Jan. 10. During that substantial interval, people at the court now appear to think, the chief justice will have a chance to assess his situation and decide whether to retire. Although there seems to be widespread public confusion on this point - memories have faded in the 18 years since Chief Justice Rehnquist's contentious confirmation hearing - a chief justice must be separately nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, even if the person is already sitting on the Supreme Court. If the president wants to choose a sitting justice, he can pick any of them, without regard to seniority. Historically, promotion from within has been the exception; only 5 of the 16 chief justices previously served as associate justices, including Chief Justice Rehnquist, who spent his first 14 years on the court as an associate before President Ronald Reagan offered him a promotion in 1986. The timing of his illness, more than two months before the start of the 109th Congress, raises another prospect: that of a recess appointment to the court. The Constitution gives the president the power to make
Re: In a Sky Dark With Arrows, Death Rained Down
-- Peter Gutmann wrote: That's the traditional Agincourt interpretation. More modern ones (backed up by actual tests with arrows of the time against armour, in which the relatively soft metal of the arrows was rather ineffective against the armour) I find this very hard to believe. Post links, or give citations. (There were other problems as well, e.g. the unusually high death toll and removal of ancient aristocratic lineages was caused by English commoners who weren't aware of the tradition of capturing opposing nobles and having them ransomed back, rather than hacking them to pieces on the spot. Wrong French nobles were taken prisoner in the usual fashion, but executed because the English King commanded them executed. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG R2tc27UGwjykTsUjBSVNU/VakHCZzthZfJpceSzP 49ifULPODBC+M+WzhF3jxg1W5+UV7ABaMjvVW7R8b
Re: In a Sky Dark With Arrows, Death Rained Down
-- Peter Gutmann wrote: That's the traditional Agincourt interpretation. More modern ones (backed up by actual tests with arrows of the time against armour, in which the relatively soft metal of the arrows was rather ineffective against the armour) You have this garbled. According to http://www.royalarmouries.org/extsite/view.jsp?sectionId=1025 by the fifteen hundreds, the very finest armor could deflect almost all bodkin arrows - but very few could afford a complete set of the very finest armor - and the battle of Agincourt occurred well before the fifteen hundreds. Presumably the armor improved (and became heavier and more expensive) in response to the battle of Agincourt. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG wY4Gt1+GdEkqgNLQxKrMduPJSg/k6DEUpWEGeADc 48Orz+xAb/+RsojnqG7H/GLzb+Ll5QWvCCvF9MkuG
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
-- James Donald: I routinely call people like you nazi-commies. Eugen Leitl wrote: How novel and interesting. Cut the rhetoric, get on with the program. Cypherpunks write code. I also write code, unlike people like you. See for example www.echeque.com/Kong --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG iRF6jCg0M9tIDOFv9wmxaZxcMi0N2C6vQn8oF4IO 42OhxMux7d4g+wGUgQBqxmiP8H6QXmmOGpbq5bqCd
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:46:17AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Of course. What kind of question is that? Regardless of voting fraud, about half of US has voted for four more years of the same. Guilty. Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) Huh? What was the question, again? -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgplDt75HxeY3.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: The Values-Vote Myth
He won because 53 percent of voters approved of his performance as president. Fifty-eight percent of them trust Bush to fight terrorism. They had roughly equal confidence in Bush and Kerry to handle the economy. Most approved of the decision to go to war in Iraq. Most see it as part of the war on terror. In other words, he won because some hillbilly was afraid that the guy at the local 7-11 was going to blow up his chicked farm. Those of us living close enough to Ground Zero to smell it back in those days are apprarently less than convinced. So: A 'moral values' question for Cypherpunks. Does this election indict the American people as being complicit in the crime known as Operation Freedom? (I notice everyone forgot about that name.) -TD _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
The Values-Vote Myth
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/opinion/06brooks.html?hp=pagewanted=printposition= The New York Times November 6, 2004 OP-ED COLUMNIST The Values-Vote Myth By DAVID BROOKS Every election year, we in the commentariat come up with a story line to explain the result, and the story line has to have two features. First, it has to be completely wrong. Second, it has to reassure liberals that they are morally superior to the people who just defeated them. In past years, the story line has involved Angry White Males, or Willie Horton-bashing racists. This year, the official story is that throngs of homophobic, Red America values-voters surged to the polls to put George Bush over the top. This theory certainly flatters liberals, and it is certainly wrong. Here are the facts. As Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center points out, there was no disproportionate surge in the evangelical vote this year. Evangelicals made up the same share of the electorate this year as they did in 2000. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who are pro-life. Sixteen percent of voters said abortions should be illegal in all circumstances. There was no increase in the percentage of voters who say they pray daily. It's true that Bush did get a few more evangelicals to vote Republican, but Kohut, whose final poll nailed the election result dead-on, reminds us that public opinion on gay issues over all has been moving leftward over the years. Majorities oppose gay marriage, but in the exit polls Tuesday, 25 percent of the voters supported gay marriage and 35 percent of voters supported civil unions. There is a big middle on gay rights issues, as there is on most social issues. Much of the misinterpretation of this election derives from a poorly worded question in the exit polls. When asked about the issue that most influenced their vote, voters were given the option of saying moral values. But that phrase can mean anything - or nothing. Who doesn't vote on moral values? If you ask an inept question, you get a misleading result. The reality is that this was a broad victory for the president. Bush did better this year than he did in 2000 in 45 out of the 50 states. He did better in New York, Connecticut and, amazingly, Massachusetts. That's hardly the Bible Belt. Bush, on the other hand, did not gain significantly in the 11 states with gay marriage referendums. He won because 53 percent of voters approved of his performance as president. Fifty-eight percent of them trust Bush to fight terrorism. They had roughly equal confidence in Bush and Kerry to handle the economy. Most approved of the decision to go to war in Iraq. Most see it as part of the war on terror. The fact is that if you think we are safer now, you probably voted for Bush. If you think we are less safe, you probably voted for Kerry. That's policy, not fundamentalism. The upsurge in voters was an upsurge of people with conservative policy views, whether they are religious or not. The red and blue maps that have been popping up in the papers again this week are certainly striking, but they conceal as much as they reveal. I've spent the past four years traveling to 36 states and writing millions of words trying to understand this values divide, and I can tell you there is no one explanation. It's ridiculous to say, as some liberals have this week, that we are perpetually refighting the Scopes trial, with the metro forces of enlightenment and reason arrayed against the retro forces of dogma and reaction. In the first place, there is an immense diversity of opinion within regions, towns and families. Second, the values divide is a complex layering of conflicting views about faith, leadership, individualism, American exceptionalism, suburbia, Wal-Mart, decorum, economic opportunity, natural law, manliness, bourgeois virtues and a zillion other issues. But the same insularity that caused many liberals to lose touch with the rest of the country now causes them to simplify, misunderstand and condescend to the people who voted for Bush. If you want to understand why Democrats keep losing elections, just listen to some coastal and university town liberals talk about how conformist and intolerant people in Red America are. It makes you wonder: why is it that people who are completely closed-minded talk endlessly about how open-minded they are? What we are seeing is a diverse but stable Republican coalition gradually eclipsing a diverse and stable Democratic coalition. Social issues are important, but they don't come close to telling the whole story. Some of the liberal reaction reminds me of a phrase I came across recently: The rage of the drowning man. -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
John Young: Tyler, Commie is the term used here like is nazi used elsewhere as the most fearsome if thoughtless epithet. Nazi here is a term of endearment, and also admirable role model by some. Calling someone both is not allowed, check the FAQ under impurity. Tim May, praise Allah, always claimed cypherpunks was a fair and balanced forum thanks to the one person of the left here who was fingered affectionately like a house rodent, an easy target for errant shooters. CJ is not to be recalled, ever. Jim Bell still sends very important legal papers, the latest yesterday, which describe the way things should be understood. But who can believe an MIT chemist political prisoner. CJ and Jim jailed by the Democratic freedom-fighters. CJ is CJ Parker, who posted a few emails to this list back in early 2003? I guess I haven't been around long enough to know all famous cpunks who have been posting to the list. Maybe someone could tell in short who those were, I guess there are one or two on the list who weren't around and would appreciate the stories. I think I remember having read about Bell, something about him having threatened FBI agents or something? Does Jim Bell post emails somewhere today?
Why Americans Hate Dissenters
On CJ (Carl Johnson) and Jim Bell: There was a time when the greatest terrorist threat to the US was located in the northwestern part of the country, Idaho, Washington State and Oregon, some of California. Militia the infidels were called. The US Attorney's Office in Tacoma, WA, was a center of counterterrorist activity, aided by FBI, Treasury, IRS, US Marshals, DEA and others. Jim Bell was twice busted, tried, convicted and jailed, by the Tacoma USA, for alleged acts against the USG, primarily the IRS, but knowledgeable citizens presume the assault was the result of his essay, Assassination Politics (AP), which descibed a system for anonymous killing of varmints, government officials especially, but not limited to those. CJ defended Jim with a series of online statements on his behalf, and for allegedly running an online version of AP. For this misbehavior he was busted, tried, convicted and jailed, also by the Tacoma USA. Jim served his first term, allegedly misbehaved again, and was sent to jail again, where he remains and continues to file appeals of his railroading. CJ served a term and is now free, pursuing among other wonders his career as the King of Country Porn. Bell and CJ posted regularly to cypherpunks during their days of pre-jailing, and some of their messages here were used against them during trial. An agent of the IRS, Jeff Gordon was a known subscriber of cypherpunks for the purpose of surveilling members and stashing useful email evidence to advance his career -- Jeff was indeed awarded honors for his investigation and jailing of the heroes of the revolution. Here's a US Marshal report on Jeff's snooping: - http://cryptome.org/jdb/usms020499.htm On November 25, 1997, Inspector Jeff GORDAN with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Portland, Oregon, contacted the U.S. Marshals Service, Tacoma, Washington, regarding an internet posting he had obtained on this day (see attached). [http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.97.11.20-97.11.26/msg00274.html] On the same date, Deputy U.S. Marshal STEPHENSON contacted Inspector GORDAN in an attempt obtain further details regarding the individuals mentioned in the internet posting. Inspector GORDAN related the following: On May 17, 1997, the IRS in Vancouver, Washington, arrested James Dalton BELL (#26906-086) for threats, assaults, obstruction, and intimidation of employees and officers of the IRS. During IRS's initial investigation of BELL, the IRS discovered that BELL was associated with the Multnomah County Common Law Court as well as the author of Assassination Politics, an essay that describes and advocates the development and use of a system to reward people who kill selected Government employees. BELL was also known to transmit his beliefs via internet services (see W/WA case #CR97-5270FDB). Inspector GORDON indicated that since BELL's arrest his office has been monitoring internet postings by the Cypherpunks, one of the groups BELL was known to be communicating with. Many of the postings are simply communications between members of the group regarding their dissatisfaction with the Government. Inspector GORDAN related that this posting was a concern due to the statement made by the author, indicating that Tim MAY announced he would be murdering Jim Bell's judge (known to be U.S. District Judge Franklin BURGESS or Magistrate J. Kelly ARNOLD) on Friday, at 4;00 p.m. Inspector GORDAN indicated that he is not familiar with the author of the posting, Bad BobbyH, however he was familiar with Tim MAY. Inspector GORDAN described MAY as being an anarchist/survivalist who seems to spend much of his time communicating his beliefs via the internet. According to Inspector GORDAN, MAY is retired and fairly well off, making his fortune years ago by developing computer programs. May also has a tendency to attempt to goat or bait law enforcement officers into taking action and has repeatedly stated he would shoot any law enforcement officers who attempted to arrest him. Inspector GORDAN provided the following information regarding the individuals mentioned in the posting: Timothy C. MAY (DoB: 12/21/51 SSN: XXX-XX-XXX) XXX Corralltos, CA 95078 Robert HETTINGA XXX Boston, MA 02131 Inspector GORDAN disclosed that his office is unable to trace the posting because the address, Robert Heidegger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), is false/untraceable. On November 25, 1997, U.S. District Judge Franklin BURGESS and Magistrate Judge J. Kelly ARNOLD were notified by Supervisory Deputy Glenn WHALEY and Deputy STEPHENSON reference the internet posting. A copy of the internet posting was forwarded to FBI Special Agent Ron Stankye (360) 695-5661. Attached is a copy of another posting by the Cypherpunks previously received on June 23, 1997 regarding Magistrate J. Kelly ARNOLD. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Deputy STEPHENSON at (253) 593-6344. - Several cypherpunks
Re: In a Sky Dark With Arrows, Death Rained Down
R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: These were not the sort of sporting arrows skillfully shot toward gayly colored targets by Victorian archery societies (charmingly described by Mr. Soar in later chapters) but heavy bodkin pointed battle shafts that went through the armor of man and horse. That's the traditional Agincourt interpretation. More modern ones (backed up by actual tests with arrows of the time against armour, in which the relatively soft metal of the arrows was rather ineffective against the armour) tend to favour the muddy ground trapping men and horses, lack of room to manoeuver/compression effects, and arrows killing horses out from under the knights, at which point see the muddy ground section. Obviously the machine- gun effect of the arrows was going to cause a number of minor injuries, and would be lethal to unarmoured troops, but they weren't quite the wonder-weapon they're made out to be. (There were other problems as well, e.g. the unusually high death toll and removal of ancient aristocratic lineages was caused by English commoners who weren't aware of the tradition of capturing opposing nobles and having them ransomed back, rather than hacking them to pieces on the spot. Again, arrows didn't have much to do with the loss of so many nobles). Peter.
Re: This Memorable Day
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Tiarn=E1n_=D3_Corr=E1in?=) writes: The Russians (for example) conquered Hitler's capital, Berlin. And I believe the Russian zone in Germany was larger than any of the others, reflecting the fact that Stalin bore most of entire burden of defeating Germany, uncomfortable as it may be. The figure that's usually quoted is that 80% of German's military force was directed against Russia. Of the remaining 20%, a lot had already been engaged by France, the UK (via the BEF, the RAF, North Africa), Greece, etc etc before the US got involved in Europe. So the Russians should get most of the credit. Peter.
