How Do We Ensure the Integrity of Voting?

[Joyce Sutherland]

When it became known that our 2012 election ~ the most important in US history ~ would be taken over completely by a company in Spain, I was appalled. And, then came the news that this company, once called S.O.E., had changed its name to "Scytl," I became suspicious. It turns out that I have every right to be suspicious. The company was purchased, lock, stock & barrel, by the largest contributor of Obama's 2008 campaign ~ George Soros. Apparently, the company supplies the voting machines, then take all of the ballots to Spain to be counted. I hear people advocating for "paper ballots!" How are we going to get a fair election?

[Joyce Sutherland]

Here is a link to one of the articles: http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2012/018obama-donor-scytl/

[Joyce Sutherland]

Thanks, Patty! I had seen the video. And, I've written to my elected officials at the federal level w/o response. I am going to try going at it from a local level. And, if you have any tips on how to get petitions signed, please let me know. Everyone seems to be thinking that somebody else is going to do something!! It's going to take millions, & there is no reason that we shouldn't be able to do just that!!

[Betz Hermes]

Every Secretary of State must demand that a paper ballot used and then entered into a machine.  In fact people must demand that their ballots be counted in state with a paper trail.  Write, call, fax and email your representatives at the state level and demand that votes be counted by the states.

There should three types of machines.  One under the damocraps, one under the Republican and one neutral.  The marked ballot would be entered individually in each machine.  If all three machines did not match, then they would be checked against the ballot.  The paper ballot would be the deciding factor.

[Snowman8wa]

Joyce this is an urban myth that is being spread around the internet.  It is on SNOPES, with the explanation as to why it is false.  http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/scytl.asp

States fund and run their own elections. If we want our elections to be accurate, then We must demand that our Secretary of State and the State Election Commitees provide a secure form of elections.  If you don't want "big Brother" knowing all your information, which could make it more difficult for fraud, then We must think of a different avenue of securing our votes.

It could be as simple as a Personal Voter ID number or code that ONLY you know and can use to have your vote count.  This code/PIN would be recorded when YOU prove you meet the criteria as a LEGAL voter.  It could be that simple.  But the liberal left would, of course, oppose such a program; as you would have to bring the dogs, corpses, and illegals into the Registar's office for verification. 

 

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis

[Twana Blevins]

Kevin please vet Snopes for yourself. Snopes is a tool of the progressives. Look around the site to see who funds it and who runs it. I learned the truth about Snopes about 2-3 years ago. I am assuming the funding and more info is still on Snopes site. Previously to that time, I did know for a fact some of their info was flat out wrong...but alot of people still didn't know the truth about them back in those days.........

[Snowman8wa]

I understand Twana and I've done further checking through "FACTCHECK.org".  I agree you have to KNOW where the information is coming from.  But at what point does the site become a spawing pool for a Left/right winged conspiracy?  When they don't completely agree with a person 100% of the time?  I hear the same thing about Fact Check, yet Fact Check just debunked Obama's claim about Romney and Bain Capital.  So you must ask yourself, "What fiendish plan does George Soros (who is supposedly behind BOTH) have in supporting Mitt Romney?  

Fact Check has done some of their own checking of claims regarding SNOPES and comes back with the following regarding the owners of SNOPES:

 

..."Then it has been learned the Mikkelson’s are very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal," adding: "There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson’s liberalism revealing itself in their website findings."  The author cites no evidence and no sources for either of these propositions.

We asked David. He told us that Barbara is a Canadian citizen, and as such isn’t allowed to vote here or contribute money to U.S. candidates. As for him, "My sole involvement in politics is on Election Day to go out and vote. I’ve never joined a party, worked for a campaign or donated money to a candidate."

"You’d be hard-pressed to find two more apolitical people," David Mikkelson said. We checked online to see if he had given money to any federal candidates, and nothing turned up. Mikkelson even faxed us a copy of his voter registration form. He asked us not to post an image of it here, but we can confirm that it shows he declined to state a party affiliation when he registered last year, and also that when he registered in 2000 he did so as a Republican.

Do the Snopes.com articles reveal a political bias? We reviewed a sampling of their political offerings, including some on rumors about George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, and we found them to be utterly poker-faced. David does say that the site receives more complaints that it is too liberal than that it is too conservative. Nevertheless, he says, "We apply the same debunking standards to both sides...."

So now because FACT CHECK posts an article with this statement, does that make them part of the vast Left winged conspiracy?  I believe that some Americans WANT SO BADLY, something to be true that they cannot accept the data that is provided to support or denounce the subject at hand and the Courts of Public Opinion take over and further fuel the fires through the internet and through Generation X-ccupy dupes that will not research the facts and continue to drink and distribute the Kool-aid. 

So what are we to believe?  I search a subject, and then vet the link; anything that remotely smells partisan is overlooked, but as you well know, data is directly proportional to the agrument at hand.  If the data supports your argument then the source is accurate, if your opponent uses the same source to debunk your argument then the source is crap and cannot be trusted.  E.g...if the Department of Labor stats are acurate for the Dems statments, then the bad numbers from the Department of Labor are also relevant for Republicans to use to debunk the statement.  Now it appears that even if you go to historical sites, you have to beware of revisionism or poorly researched/hearsay posted information.  Everything is in question because of this. 

 

You do an EXTRORDINARY job in your research and postings, there are few Americans that would take 1/10th the time to research BEFORE they open their mouths or press their fingers on the keys.  So based on the subject, if what Joyce is saying is true, then what will I be watching when the local news is showing our illustrious State of Washington election committee counting ballots because a race is too close to call? Or any State for that matter....I bet that come 2014 and 2016, this myth will raise it's ugly head again, as they usually repeat themselves in cycles directly in line with the subject at hand.

 

Thank you again for the great articles I have read so far since joining; you give me great incentive on improving my postings on the Awakened Nation and here, when I do get around to posting.

 

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis