Saturday, August 07, 2004
In an editorial in Newsday, Pinkerton suggests that the Democrats are using concerns about Diebold to divert attention from their own plan to steal votes. His evidence? That everybody knows Daly's Chicago machine stole the election in 1960.
This argument is just bizarre. An event which may or may not have happened (whatever Pinkerton claims) nearly half a century ago is supposed to prove more revealing than the undisputed actions of the last four years? What kind of logic is this?
For your edification, let's look at the recent evidence of monkeying with the vote by both parties. Then we will evaluate who should be under greater suspicion for trying to subvert the democratic process.
1) Advertising the wrong election dates in black neighborhoods
2) Sending bogus letters to blacks that they have to have their rent paid before they vote.
3) Surrounding polling places with armed guards, which will intimidate voters
4) Striking blacks off the voting rolls, falsely claiming they are "felons"
5) Opposing a paper trail for computerized voting machines, thus preventing a real recount.
6) Sponsoring the use of machines by a company which is a contributor to the Republican party.
That seems to clear the matter up, don't you think?