Rep. Sam Hunt, in a letter to reader Kelly McGrew, wrote the following:
"We Finished the Most Accurate Vote Count in State History."Which inspired the following satire:"Votes have been checked, double checked and triple checked under the eyes of thousands of Democratic and Republican county auditors, observers, and elections officials, giving ample opportunity for counties to correct any errors."
Student declared valedictorian despite actual gradesSoundPolitics.com- Copyright © 2005 Brian Crouch Posted by Brian Crouch at January 08, 2005 11:10 AM | Email This(Olympia- SP) After a long battle within Richard J. Daley Memorial high school, Greg Christoire will be named valedictorian. This comes amid controversy after another student, Ross Dean, was determined twice to have a higher GPA: a third hand-perusal of scan-tron tests, exams, and nine instances of newly discovered extra-credit homework, gave Christoire the .0000000000026 grade point advantage he needed for the high school's top honors.
Several classmates, however, allege that he did not deserve many of the marks he received. "I am not saying he cheated on his tests, but how can they count the 'A' given by Mary K. LeTourneau? She never taught here! And the A+ from Mr. Kennedy? He died two years ago!" said the editor of the school paper, "The Logger."
Another student observed, "I saw a teacher write Christoire's name on two tests because she couldn't find who turned 'em in. 32 tests, with 30 students in the class? I may not be an A student, but..."Although admitting these allegations were true, when asked about the erroneous grades and test results from teachers dead or in jail, the principal patted this reporter on the head and responded: "Look, the tests have been checked, double-checked and triple-checked under the eyes of dozens of teachers, janitors, Christoire's parents and their employees and friends. This is the most accurate grading we've ever had."
When asked how it could possibly matter how many times tests are graded which should never have been included in the first place, she replied: "Nobody has proved the valedictorian-select cheated. It was a close one, but there are no do-overs. So this idea that we only count proper scores by employed or living teachers is ludicrous, preposterous."
What a JOKE!!!!
Posted by: Norm Gilbertson on January 8, 2005 12:06 PMGregoire chooses some familiar faces
"She also noted she hasn't had much time to search for new people, given a tumultuous election that went through two recounts."
"What's the disadvantage of the recount? The disadvantage is selecting people," she said. "Until 10 days ago I couldn't talk to anybody about a job. Only after [Secretary of State Sam Reed] certified me could I really begin discussions of, 'OK, are you interested in working for a Gregoire administration and what position would you like?'"
Well! THAT certainly gives one pause and begs reflection on the caliber and/or qualifications of the folks likely to inhabit HER administration!
Posted by: Cheryl on January 8, 2005 12:07 PMWe certainly need comic relief in all this. I have been getting a lot of good laughs out of
some of the "serious" liberal posts.
Liberal logic 101:
Ultimately, it’s the responsibility of voters to "acknowledge that they qualify to vote."
Pierce County Auditor Pat McCarthy.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/4418973p-4187247c.html
I might have taken this out of context, please see article. Responsibility? New word spin in this election process.
Posted by: JG on January 8, 2005 12:20 PMSubject: Decertify 2004 General Election
Attention: Sam Reed
sreed@secstate.wa.gov
Honorable Secretary of State Sam Reed.
You are required by RCW 43.07.030 (6) to certify to the legislature the election returns for all officers required by the Constitution to be so certified, and certify to the governor the names of all other persons who have received at any election the highest number of votes for any office the incumbent of which is to be commissioned by the governor.
The State Constitution, RCW’s, Attorney General opinions, Case Law, findings by the Secretary Of State’s Office, and your own public admissions require you to decertify your previous certification based, in part, on the following:
1) King County alone counted 3,539 more votes than the number of people who actually voted.
2) King County "discovered" additional ballots 9 different times.
3) King County disenfranchised some soldiers in Iraq who never received their ballot.
4) Poll workers fed many provisional ballots directly into counting machines, commingling them with legal ballots and circumventing the process of keeping them out of the count if they proved to be illegal.
5) Elections workers "enhanced" more than 55,000 ballots, but contrary to state law, they permanently obscured the original marks on many, preventing a review of their decisions.
6) There are 557 names in the Jan. 7 file for people who supposedly voted on Nov. 2, but who weren't listed in the Nov. 1 file. Only 94 of the 557 are in the Dec. 29 file. There are a number of pre-2004 registration dates among the 557, but many of these aren't in the June file. 280 of the 557 are shown to have registered on dates between Jun 7, 2004 and Oct. 2, 2004, yet did not appear in any of the earlier versions of the King County voter databases.
7) Seattle's Precinct 1823 counted 343 ballots, which is 71 more ballots than the 272 voters who cast them. This is the single largest discrepancy between ballots and voters in all of King County. Nearly all of the discrepancy is due to "provisional ballots".
Decertify your previous certification at once.
Stefan Sharkansky from http://www.soundpolitics.com/ has single handedly done the research your office should have done in the first place, and apparently hasn’t: sad to say. You ought to hire him to your office and get rid of a few on your staff who must be asleep at the wheel.
Here are a few things Stefan Sharkansky says you should have done, and haven’t:
1) Develop Rules to implement the Help America Vote Act of 2002. HAVA requires a computerized statewide voter registration list that is "uniform, official, and centralized" containing a record of every legally registered individual. If this database was created, it certainly wasn't used to scrub the illegal voters. Instead while felons voted from jail, soldiers were disenfranchised;
2) Protect the absolute secrecy of ballots. The State Constitution (Article 6, Section 6) requires "absolute secrecy" in the handling of ballots. Yet while Reed sat idly by, a King County judge gave over the names of over 400 voters whose signatures didn't match records to Democratic operatives. Those operatives solicited affidavits (and may have forged signatures). So much for absolute secrecy. Reed now proposes election reform that would preclude the handling of affidavits by 3rd parties.
3) Don't certify the results if counties are unable to reconcile their voter lists with ballots cast. State law requires the Secretary of State to "Certify to the legislature the election returns for all officers required by the Constitution . . ." RCW 43.10.030. Yet why did Reed rush to certify the results before King County could reconcile its voter list?
Among the more fundamental reforms we need, Stefan Sharkansky says you should have done, and haven’t:
1) documentation of identity and citizenship to register and vote.
2) strict controls against duplicate registrations
3) strict enforcement of registration at bona fide residence; documentation of residence required -- including (especially) for new absentee where the mailing address is in a different precinct (or state or country) from the residence address.
4) Immediate purge of the deceased from the voter rolls, using data from vital records.
5) requirement that ballot counts strictly reconcile with voter counts prior to certification. If counts don't reconcile within the margin of victory, the election is tossed.
Decertify your previous certification at once.
Regards.
Martin
/s/ 01/08/2005
Martin D. Ringhofer
Seattle, WA 98117
(206) 783-0890 (206) 784-5920 --
Email address: martinringhofer@aol.com
America's stinginess is a long-standing leitmotif for liberals — which is getting hard to square with their love for America. When it comes to heaping insults on America, U.S. liberals are the nation's leading donors.
I guess there are as many ways to calculate "aid" as there are to calculate "love of country." According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in 2003, the U.S. gave $37.8 billion out of a total $108.5 billion in foreign aid from the world's major countries — notable for being more than three times the amount from the next largest donor, the Netherlands, clocking in at $12.2 billion. Americans make up about 5 percent of the world's population and give about 35 percent of the aid.
The prestigious Princeton "ethicist" Peter Singer, who endorses sex with animals and killing children with birth defects, says "when it comes to foreign aid, America is the most stingy nation on Earth."
And has some enterprising reporter asked Sen. Patty Murray what she thinks about the U.S.'s efforts on the tsunami? How about compared to famed philanthropist Osama bin Laden?
In December 2002, Murray was extolling Osama bin Laden's good works in the Middle East, informing a classroom of students: "He's been out in these countries for decades building roads, building schools, building infrastructure, building day-care facilities, building health-care facilities, and the people are extremely grateful. It made their lives better." What does Murray say about bin Laden's charity toward the (mostly Muslim) tsunami victims?
Speaking of world leaders admired by liberals, why isn't Fidel Castro giving the tsunami victims some of that terrific medical care liberals tell us he has been providing the people of Cuba?
Stipulating that liberals love America—which apparently depends on what the meaning of "love" is— do they love America as much as they love bin Laden and Castro.
Ann Coulter
Posted by: tributetoheadlessloosy on January 8, 2005 12:54 PMTongue planted firmly in cheek,
Dan
"Let it RIP." Have all your friends forward to anyone they wish. Yee ALL have permission to forward at will. This election is sheer madeness.
ALL are encouraged to write their own letter to SAM REED, asking he DECERTIFY at once. Why bother having the court battle when the election is obviously a fraud and the most fraudulent election that has been held in the history of this nation.
While you are at it, check out Saturday's PI, I appear on page A6 holding up dozens of absentee ballots the county has been sending to my address for my parents who have departed 7 & 8 years ago.
At this point, it would be nearly impossible to convince me that it was not the DEAD who decided this election.
I will gladly communicate with ANYONE who wishes to communicate.
If we sweep the overwhelming facts of errors, fraud, and non compliance to laws in the election under the rug we all lose!
Posted by: Joe on January 8, 2005 01:42 PMJoe, it's an extreme and virulent case of that old Wizard of Oz syndrome that has its grip on the various and asundry libs: 'Ignore that man behind the curtain!'
Posted by: Cheryl on January 8, 2005 01:59 PMWith only hours left before the Legislature votes to ratify this fraudulent election, there is no time to waste to commence a RECALL SAM REED drive for failure to carry out his obligation to protect the people from the fraudulent election results which have been documented, verified, admitted to, beyond anyone's reasonable doubt.
What Sam Reed is guilty of is not only (A) doing what he should not have done, but (B) not doing what he is required to do, under these documented and verifiable reasons. If we, the people, take this -- and accept promises the process will be cleaned up "later," we indeed are fools who allowed it to happen.
ALL who read this site, and agree with (A) the election must be decertified at once, (B) Sam Reed has the obligation to decertify, (C) and agree with (A) and (B): write, call, communicate, with anyone who might feel likewise, and lets stop this madness.
If you agree: contact anyone who may aid in the effort. Perhaps a revotewa.org move to spot another petition, to parallel the petition to revote.
Thoughts, comments, agree, disagree?
Faced with criticism, this is how you react? Others, who debate with facts and ideas, I hope you come out against such outrage with the passion such deserves. If I were a Rossi supporter, I would be incensed that someone would be making such outrageous, personal, vicious statements. You reasonable Republicans agree?
Posted by: Scared for USA on January 8, 2005 02:34 PMI personally will spare none of my time to repudiate some chap writing chiding, sardonic comments (on a blog for goodness sake!) to another commenter who has consistently used abusive language in this forum, and hideously nasty comments about America in her own (widely ignored and puerile) forum.
She can defend herself if she has the head for it: they're only words after all.
Posted by: Bleeding heart conservative on January 8, 2005 02:41 PMMartin has an important post...leave it to the lib to try to divert us from something we need to talk about that has real meaning.
Posted by: Susu on January 8, 2005 02:42 PMScared, I'm curious, does THIS incense you too? Or do you just suffer from selective outrage?
"Shaun, you're ignorance is showing. I hope an incompetent doctor cripples you for life and you have "The max." [250,000 dollars] to live out your warped and twisted sense of social responsibility in a more personal way. You'll get no pity or mercy from Headless Lucy. I would taunt you in your "Rascal" as you shop pathetically at Safeway."
Posted by: Cheryl on January 8, 2005 02:44 PMheadless lucy is the epitome of the lunatic fringe left - faced with facts, she demonically screams...once the fit is over, she recycles her previous garbage, thus sustaining her as she alternates between looney and demented.
As for Scared, at least he some points to bring to the discussion, as much as I disagree with him. This forum would not interest me much if all it contained were one sided views and everyone in agreement...
Posted by: smegma on January 8, 2005 03:30 PMEven the self-serving Rossi campaign has stopped it's pathetically shrill shouts of "FRAUD!" and changed to the latest excuse du'jour -- more mistakes were made than the margin of Gregoire's victory.
Did it ever occur to you monkeys that once Rossi's claims get rejected by the Supreme Court your infantile fun-and-games are over and Gregoire will be your Governor?
Rossi will go down in history as the sore loser that wouldn't concede. You idiots will go back to worshipping George W. Bush and Rush Limbaugh on your knees and the citizens of Washington State will be better for not having been subjected to four years of corporate giveaways enabled by your hero.
[deleted for profanity]
Posted by: Sore Losers on January 8, 2005 06:56 PM"Even the self-serving Rossi campaign has stopped it's pathetically shrill shouts of "FRAUD!" and changed to the latest excuse du'jour -- more mistakes were made than the margin of Gregoire's victory."
Thank you for making our point.
Sorry, you can go back to sleep...
Posted by: smegma on January 8, 2005 07:08 PMI find it so insulting to receive the same letter that reader Kelly McGrew received from Sam Reed.
It is a very lengthy letter, lots of words lots of quoting what Sam Reed said, but nothing that accurately refutes the basis for contesting the election. I think that "they" suppose that we'll open our mail, be it snail mail or email, be overwhelmed by the length and vocabulary, put it away and shut up. Well, not this citizen.
One thing (among many) that Sam Hunt wrote that is just outrageous is that "Claims of excess ballots are unfounded--Republicans received early voter's lists." Well, even after reconciling them, King County admits to being 1217 voters short. And, that was before Stefan's post this morning about the 557. Sam Hunt also says "We cannot have a "re-vote". He says "County elections officials bent over backwards to help military voters cast their ballots." Really???
And, "The main problem with the governor's race is that it was very, very close.
I'm sure that did become a problem for them, as they weren't prepared for such a close race, otherwise they would not have had to find ballots NINE times.
Sam Hunt's concluding paragraph was headed "Christine Gregoire played by the established rules and state laws", again I say, really?? They why did they go to the Supreme Court to recanvass rather then recount ballots that were not previously tallied?
They can't really think that we are all mindless can they? It just reinforces my decision to homeschool my children. We may not spend 6.5 hours a day playing "school", but I bet my nine year old and fourteen year old sons have a much better understanding of this election than your average adult, and they can think for themselves.
I sure hope that all of you who feel as passionately about this as I do show up January 11, 2005 at 10:30 a.m. at the state capitol.
Many thanks to all of the contributors at soundpolitics, especially Stefan.
Robyn
What kind of money are we talking about, in Euro-dollars?
Posted by: JG on January 8, 2005 09:08 PMI simply wanted to make the distinction.
Posted by: Dan on January 8, 2005 09:30 PMThe comment on trolling was hook-in-mouth.
You hooked, and landed me.
The link you mention is a good one.
Posted by: JG on January 9, 2005 09:00 AMP.S. was one of the recount workers at the King County facility. Needless to say, I don't think I want to do that again. WOEFULLY inaccurate.
Posted by: John L. on January 10, 2005 09:23 AM