It is offensive and irresponsible
to believe the American people don't care who runs our country. Talk to
most Americans and you'll find they love America, and have respect for
the military, our countless accomplishments and the many contributions
we gave the world. Often to a fault.
Bush Jr. was re-elected after the worst mass killing on US soil in history.
Did anyone notice that most people about 10 years ago often said they
didn't vote for him when asked?
Obama promised jobs and prosperity four years ago. Instead all we got
was more war - all this from a man who immediately won the coveted Nobel
Peace Prize when becoming president without ever earning it.
When digital voting machines first came out, there were numerous accusations
of fraud, useless voting machine security and crooked software. Hard examples
of these problems were brought to light at the time. One dirt cheap, low-security
key could be used to open the memory card slot on any number of voting
machines. A few years ago, a university demonstrated in a video that in
less then 3 minutes they could hack a voting machine and take total control
of it. They simply put their own start-up software on a memory card and
inserted it into the memory card slot. When the machine is powered up,
the machines read the memory card like a hard disk drive, allowing malicious
software to be loaded in and run. Instead, it should handle the card slot
strictly as a data drive. Most likely this was done to allow easy software
update installation - without any regard for hacker attacks.
Besides the insecure voting machines which sport a memory card slot barn
door for hacker convenience, there's even more going on in the county
clerk's computer. A software programmer (apparently his conscious got
to him) testified on capitol hill more than ten years ago that he worked
for Diebold. Diebold is, and has been, the biggest and most popular digital
voting machine manufacturer dating back to the first days of digital voting
machines. I watched this programmer testify live and under oath on CSPAN
in front of a subcommittee investigating voting fraud. He stated county
clerk software used with digital voting machines has two databases. One
database was the one the clerk knew about, but the other one was kept
According to the programmer, from any remote location anywhere in the
world recorded votes could be freely moved from one database to the other.
Yet no company was ever charged with fraud, no re-counts were made and
the entire issue of criminal vote-tampering software quietly faded away.
Even though tampering with the voting system is a serious felony, clearly
some people feel they are above the law.
We heard from people in Florida, Ohio and other states during the 2012
election that when someone voted for Romney, the machine told them they
had voted for Obama. Voting officials answered complaints with rhetoric
such as "the machine just needs re-calibrating."
It's also noteworthy that Florida and Ohio are often considered swing
So, exactly what is calibrating and re-calibrating? Calibrating or re-calibrating
are terms usually used to describe a procedure which confirms the accuracy
of a measuring instrument. Adjustment of the instrument is made to match
it to a known standard. For example, calibrating thermometers to 32F often
uses a stirred ice-water bath. A precision heat source is used to check
the thermometer can accurately read 212F. Gas stations are periodically
checked for pumping accuracy and water content by inspectors. What is
a voting machine calibrated to, and to what standard? Note that a voting
machine is a machine, not a instrument. Why wasn't voting accuracy confirmed
in every county by manually testing each machine BEFORE polls were opened?
In 2012 saw a close popular vote count, not a land-slide victory. But
the electoral vote suddenly shifted from a perfect tie to a landslide
victory. We saw the president start his campaigning late, and even fail
miserably during the first debate. Critical answers to questions during
debates often produced regurgitated rhetoric from the first time in 2008.
In his 2012 victory speech, some news networks showed him repeating many
of the same phrases regarding fixing the economy, unemployment, etc...
that he stated back in 2008.
Did late campaigning and defending himself miserably in the first debate
indicate he didn't care about being re-elected? It's more likely the same
power people who told him to run for president 4 years ago and assured
him he could win, also told him he would be re-elected this time around
no matter what. And he was.
At a salary of $400,000/year, the president's pay pales in comparison
to CEOs of the largest American corporations. Corporate CEOs often have
salaries measured in tens of millions of dollars. $400k/year is a paltry
sum to manage the federal government - the biggest employer in America
and by far, the largest corporation in America. But when the power brokers
tell a puppet to jump, puppets ask "How high?" no matter what the pay
Can you guess the percentage of presidents who have been re-elected? It
may surprise you. Over the past 232 years, only 10 presidents served one
With vote tampering issues, crooked software, easily hacked voting machines
and hidden power brokers in control - are the American people solely responsible
for voting him back in?