Just noting this

Scoop is a New Zealand-based internet news service. I know nothing about them.

Here is a page at Scoop written by a woman named Faun Otter, who has been writing about electronic vote fraud for a while. It purports to demonstrate that the state-by-state exit polls have a peculiar feature: the exit polls in ten battleground states tracked the outcome pretty well, within a point or so of the published results. In seven other battle states, however, the polls were wildly off, ranging from 4% to 15% off. And in all seven cases, the difference between the exit polls and the published vote favored George W. Bush. The difference in Ohio is 4%; the difference in Florida is 7%; in both cases, this is more than enough to switch the state from Kerry to Bush, and also give the electoral college victory to Bush.

These data do not prove anything. They are, however, curious. If the inaccuracy of the polls was random, one would expect at least some of the states to have significantly underestimated Kerry's position. But none did; all the "polling error" overstated Kerry and downplayed Bush. There are explanations for this which do not revolve around systematic vote fraud; however, given the history, I am starting to feel robbed.

Why I Love Avedon Carol

Only two kinds of people think shame and repression and punishment are the answer [to a problem]: people too lazy and ignorant to bother to find out where the problem actually arises, and people who are more interested in repression than in preventing [the problem].

The problem in her original comment was sex crime, but I think her statement generalizes nicely: drug addiction, robbery, terrorism. One doesn't solve a social problem by whacking the manifestation of the problem on the head unless one is so trapped in the ethos of violence and punishment that one does not see any other possible avenue of action.

(From the message boards at Electrolite. This is the type of conversation that used to take place on rasff and still, occasionally, does.)

James Wolcott is pretty damn good, too

Merry Kristof
Posted by James Wolcott

That great humanitarian Nicholas Kristof, speaking from the pulpit of the op-ed page of the NY Times, argues that to become the majority party again Democrats need to get over their sissy hangups about what's right and wrong, and show that they're strong enough to take on the weak.

". . . Bill Clinton won his credibility in the heartland partly by going home to Little Rock during the 1992 campaign to preside over the execution of a mentally disabled convict named Ricky Ray Rector.

"There was a moral ambiguity about Mr. Clinton's clambering to power over Mr. Rector's corpse. but unless Democrats compromise, they'll be proud and true and losers."

Now the Old Me would have found the phrase "moral ambiguity" a peculiar way to describe using a black corpse as a footstool to power (it's difficult to imagine anything less ambiguous), but the New Me recognizes that the Democrats need to lay waste to traditional constituencies if they are ever to appeal to heartland America again and slake Nick Kristof's dainty bloodlust.

. . .

No, something ballsier is needed for a turnaround in perception. A taboo or two needs to be smashed.

Therefore I am proposing that the official Democratic slogan for 2008 be "Shoot a Fag for Jesus."

Walcott's blog is a terrific flashback to the glory days of Spy Magazine. Check it out.

Relaxing

Instructions (from bruceb)

1. Stop talking about politics for a moment or two.


2. Post a reasonably-sized picture in your LJ, NOT under a cut tag, of something pleasant, such as an adorable kitten, or a fluffy white cloud, or a bottle of booze. Something that has nothing to do with politics.


3. Include these instructions, and share the love.

Hearing and obeying: