SeaViews: Insights from the Gray
Havens
November 2000
(formerly the _Rochester Rag_, formerly the _News
from Detroit_)
Motto: The surest way to get a reputation for
being a trouble maker these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases that the Founders used in the struggle for
independence.
-- C.A. Beard
Editorial:
email Steve
Anon ftp site
News Archives
Standard disclaimers apply. In addition, the author makes
no guarantees concerning the grammatical accuracy of his
writing. Submitted text files must be in raw or compressed
(.Z, .gz or PK Zip) ASCII. Image files must be in raw or
compressed (see above) GIF89 (or older).
On last month's Fix;
the answer to last month's Fix,
"IS the US energy policy sufficient?
and
Is the presidential election process sufficient?"
is
For the 1'st question, what has been the energy policy of
this administration? Basically, that energy production and
discovery are bad, and conservation and elimination of
fossil fuels are good - in other words, its been a policy of
environmentalism.
Now, there is nothing wrong with conservation - better
insulated homes,high efficiency cas and appliances, etc are
all laudable goals. However, conservation obviously can only
forestall the day when we run out of gas, so naturally the
Clinton Admin must be fostering research to replace these
dirty supplies right? Well, not quite. The DOE and NSF
programs in Solar, fusion, fission, and synthetic fuels have
all been slashed.And its important to remember this when Al
Gore said in the debates that his reinventing govt. reduced
the govt payroll by 300,000. In fact, lets look at that for
a moment.
Of that 300,000 manpower reduction, over 250,000 have
come from the armed forces. An interview with Dick Cheney
points out that in the 80's 6% of GNP went to the DOD, now
that is 3%. We used to have a near 600 ship navy, now less
than 400. Had 18 army divisions, now 10. Had 24 wings in the
Air Force, now 13. And people I have met that were in the
Armed Forces in the early 90's and had a managerial
position, quit when they were ordered to falsify annual
reviews of their people so they could be discharged for
incompetence. Now, maybe a shrunk military is a bad thing,
maybe not. But how can you believe Clinton/Gore when they
say that morale has never been higher - or when Gore looks
for an excuse to disqualify military votes in Florida? Where
did the other 50,000 person reduction come from? Take a look
at the national physics labs, and note the empty seats in
them. But not to worry, the DEA, FBI, IRS and Soc Sec
departments are as big as they have ever been.
So what is our nation's energy policy? Buy 66% of our oil
abroad, hope for warm winters, and drive Honda Civics.
As for the second question, "Is our presidential election
process sufficient?", I direct you to the guest editorials.
However, there is one thing I would like to add to the
otherwise very complete timeline offered by Peggy Noonan.
Gore attorney David Boise, who you recall led
Microsoft anti-trust investigation for the govt, convinced
Florida courts that there was a precedent for counting
dimpled chads (parts of the punch ballot that looked dented
but were not cut out). Boise claimed this precedent was set
by a 1988 congressional election in Illinois. Boise even
produced a signed affidavit from the state attorney in the
case that the ruling permitted counting dimpled chads. This
worked for Gore until the presiding judge in the IL case
heard his ruling on CNN being misrepresented. He wrote the
Wash. Post and NY Times that in his case the dimples were
not counted, and he is now seeking the license suspension of
the state attorney that signed the affidavit.
Oh, and in case you were wondering, those "votes" have
yet to be subtracted from Gores total.
Guest Editorial:
The Greenwood Position: Now we must fight for
our country.
BY PEGGY NOONAN
Friday, November 24, 2000 12:01 a.m. EST
There was a national election on Tuesday, Nov. 7. The
presidential
race was close, and would be decided by the state of
Florida. The
state's votes were counted. At the end it was close, but
George W.
Bush won.
A statewide recount was immediately and appropriately
called. At the
end it was close, but Mr. Bush won.
But the higher reaches of the Democratic Party had a game
plan for
what to do in case of a close vote in a key state, and their
machine
went into motion while Republicans slept. Even before the
recount was
over the outcome was contested.
On the afternoon of Election Day a Texas telemarketing firm
is hired to
call Democratic voters in Palm Beach County and gin up a
protest.
They had been disenfranchised. By Wednesday there are
charges that
a "butterfly" ballot, designed and approved by Democrats and
published
to no protest in the press, was confusing and thus
unfair.
Jesse Jackson is dispatched to Florida, where he charges
that
Holocaust survivors have been denied a voice. Elderly
widows
announce they never meant to vote for anyone but Al Gore. An
army
of Democratic lawyers, political operatives and union
members is
dispatched; they land in Florida and fan out, immediately
assisting in
demands for a hand count. Gore campaign manager Donna
Brazile
announces blacks were kept from the polls with racial
harassment and,
when that wasn't enough, dogs.
Three Democratic counties in Florida announce they will
hand-count.
But the rules of the hand count change and change
again.
The Florida secretary of state, a Republican elected
official, calls a
halt. She notes that hand counts are called only when there
have
been charges of broken machines or vote fraud. Fraud and
breakdown
were not charged, and did not in fact occur. She says she
will certify
the election's outcome based on the original vote count and
the
recount that followed, plus overseas absentee ballots. Mr.
Bush will be
the victor.
She is immediately smeared by Democratic operatives and in
the press.
She is a political "hack," a "Stalinist," a "commissar"; she
is a vamp, a
lackey. The Washington Post, a great newspaper, publishes
this
description of Mrs. Harris: "Her lips were overdrawn with
berry-red
lipstick--the creamy sort that smears all over a coffee cup
and leaves
smudges on a shirt collar. Her skin had been plastered and
powdered to
the texture of pre-war walls in need of a skim coat. And her
eyes,
rimmed in liner and frosted with blue shadow, bore the
telltale
homogeneous spikes of false eyelashes. Caterpillars seemed
to rise and
fall with every bat of her eyelid, with every downward
glance to double
check--before reading--her latest 'determination.' " Her
mouth is "set
in a jagged line." She has "applied her makeup with a
trowel." "One
wonders how this Republican woman, who can't even use
restraint
when she's wielding a mascara wand, will manage to . . .
make sound
decisions."
At the same time the Democratic operative Paul Begala writes
his
now-famous essay suggesting Republican candidates draw
their
political strength from murderers, sadists, racists and the
killers of
innocent children.
Soon a Democratic operative in Washington is revealed to be
gathering
information on electors who will vote for Mr. Bush in the
Electoral
College. Why? To use the information to pressure them to
vote Mr.
Gore's way. It would be surprising to hear that the famous
Democratic
Party private eyes are not on the electors' trail.
The mainstream press, watching, thinking and facing
deadlines, issues
its conclusion: Conservatives are guilty of inflammatory
rhetoric. Those
columnists, writers and public figures who have come forward
to
oppose what they see as an attempt by Clinton-Gore
operatives to
steal the 2000 presidential election are denounced as
hotheaded and
extreme, dismissed as partisan.
The hand counting continues. From the first it is completely
open to
mischief. In walks mischief.
Ballots for Mr. Bush are put in Gore piles. Scads of chads
on the floor.
Vote counters can count a partly removed chad, and then
an
almost-removed chad, and then a mark, a dimple, an
indentation, a
"pregnancy." Standards are announced, altered, announced
and
altered again. Questionable ballots are decided by
Democratic-dominated canvassing boards.
Sworn statements under oath begin to emerge: Ballots are
found with
taped chads; ballots are sabotaged, used as fans, found
bearing
Post-It Notes, dropped, misplaced. Eyewitnesses say there is
clear and
compelling evidence of distorting, reinventing, miscounting
votes. The
vote counters--many exhausted and elderly, some state
workers
dragged off lawnmowers, work 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. shifts in
badly lit
rooms. A woman from Broward County whose husband is helping
the
recount writes, "He said it's also frustrating because what
we are
seeing on the news is quite a bit different from what is
actually going
on, little chads everywhere and they have no idea where they
are
coming from."
From the Associated Press, Nov. 18, datelined Palm Beach:
"On
Saturday [one vote counter] whispered in a pool
reporter's ear as she
was leaving [the hand-counting room], "I've had it.
I'm not coming
back. There are some real games going on in here."
And not only in there. From the Miami Herald, Nov. 18: "At
least 39
felons--mostly Democrats--illegally cast absentee ballots in
Broward
and Miami-Dade counties. . . . Their convictions range from
murder and
rape to drunk driving. One is in the state's registry of
sexual
offenders."
In the first two weeks there is not a single charge of
Republican
mischief in the counting rooms. Not a single person comes
forward to
charge that a Republican has done a single thing that is
dubious,
untoward or wrong.
How could this be? With hundreds of people making thousands
of
decisions, is it possible no Democrat would even make up a
charge that
some Republican had done something wrong? One can't help but
infer
that Democratic discipline is, as usual, operative. If they
add to the
charges of corruption, a fair-minded judge might say: Then
we must
protect both sides and stop the hand counting. But if they
stop the
hand counting, Democrats will not be able to find 930 votes
for Al
Gore. And 930 is what he needs.
So no Democratic charges of corruption are leveled or
dreamed up. \
There is no evidence that the absentee ballots of felons
have been
challenged.
But the absentee ballots of members of the military were
challenged.
Many were thrown out.
In the most shameful and painful act of the hand counts,
the
Democrats on the ground, and their operators from the
Democratic
National Committee and the state organization and the Gore
campaign,
deliberately and systematically scrutinized for challenge
every military
absentee ballot, and knocked out as many as they could on
whatever
technicality they could find or even invent.
Reports begin to filter out. The Democratic army of lawyers
and
operatives marches into the counting room armed with a
five-page
memo from a Democratic lawyer, instructing them on how
to
disfranchise military voters. The lawyers and operatives
unspool reams
of computer printouts bearing the names and party
affiliation of military
voters. Those who are Republicans are subject to particular
and
seemingly relentless scrutiny. Right down to signatures on
ballots being
compared with signatures on registration cards. A ballot
bearing a
domestic postmark because a soldier had voted, sent his
ballot home
to his parents and asked them to mail it in on time, is
thrown out. A
ballot that comes with a note from an officer explaining his
ship was
not able to postmark his ballot, but that he had voted on
time--and
indeed it had arrived in time--is thrown out, because it has
no
postmark.
The Democratic operatives are ruthless, focused. As one
witness says,
"They had a clear agenda."
Received late Wednesday, an e-mail forwarded from a
Republican who
witnessed the counting of the Brevard County overseas
absentee
ballots.
It is 11:30 PM (Tuesday) and I have just returned from
the
count of absentee ballots, that started at 4PM. Gore had
five attorneys there, the sole objective was to
disenfranchise the military absentee voter. . . . They
challenged each and every vote. Their sole intent was to
disqualify each and every absentee voter. They
constantly
challenged military votes that were clearly legitimate,
but
they were able to disqualify them on a technicality. I
have
never been so frustrated in all my life as I was to see
these people fight to prevent our active duty Military
from
voting. They succeeded in a number of cases denying the
vote to these fine Men and Women.
This was a deliberate all out assault on the Armed
Forces
solely to sustain the Draft Dodger and his flunky. These
people must have a hard time looking at themselves in a
mirror. . . . They denied a number of votes postmarked
Queens NY, ballots that were clearly ordered from
overseas, clearly returned from overseas, and verified
by
the Post Office that DOD uses the Queens post office to
handle overseas mail, were denied because it didn't say
APO, They denied military votes postmarked out of
Jacksonville, Knowing full well it came from ships at
sea
and was flown into Jacksonville . . . .
This is what you can expect from a Gore administration a
further trampling on the Military and more trampling on
your
rights. . . .
The attorneys there treated it all as a joke, and when
my
wife protested their actions she was told she didn't
understand.
Television both reports the story of what is happening in
the
vote-counting rooms and doesn't report it. There are comic
pieces and
sidebars: "Amazing as it seems, Bernie, there's actually a
charge that
one of the Democratic counters has eaten a chad!"
But 16 days into the drama there has not been a single
serious,
extended and deeply reported piece on network television
investigating
the charges comprehensively. No "60 Minutes," no "Dateline,"
no
"20/20." No extended look at charges of vote tampering,
no
first-person interviews with eyewitnesses who saw the
Democratic
operatives go after and throw out the military ballots.
Television does, however, report "extraordinary anger
among
Republicans." Ed Rollins says "partisan Republicans" are
very angry
about this. Bill Schneider on CNN says he's never seen
Republicans in
Washington "so angry." They muse about "the big question":
Will these
Republicans ever accept the legitimacy of a Mr. Gore if he
becomes
president?
Oddly enough Republicans do not think that's the big
question.
Can the Democrats steal this election is the question.
Why is mainstream television (not the talk shows, not Sean
and Alan,
not "Crossfire," but the mainstream news shows) missing this
story,
underreporting it?
It would be taking sides.
It would be partisan.
It would be extreme.
But there is more. We have all noticed the ideological
evolution of
media in our time. Television is liberal,
establishment-oriented, and
does what it does: It entertains. Shut out of television and
eager for
news, conservatives have turned in the past 20 years to
radio. And so
now radio is conservative, and full of uproar. The Internet
too is
conservative, and full of information, of samizdat.
But television, the elite media, the great broadsheet
newspapers, and
the clever people who talk loudly on television--that is,
the powers
that be, the forces that are--day by day appear through
action and
inaction, through an inability to see and a refusal to see,
to be (a)
allowing the stealing of an election in Florida, and (b)
subtly taking out
the critics of this hijacking.
What are we to do?
In 1939, during parliamentary debate on the coming war in
Europe,
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain finished another of his
hopeful,
frightened speeches about making peace with Hitler. The
Labour
member of Parliament Arthur Greenwood rose to speak in
opposition. As
he did, the voice of a Tory parliamentarian pierced the
chamber.
"Speak for England, Arthur!" he called. At that the chamber
exploded,
and Chamberlain realized that further appeasement was
intolerable.
We are all of us, one way or another, in the Greenwood
position. And
we must speak not as members of a party but as members of
a
nation--the great and fabled one that has been, through our
lives, the
hope of the world.
The Florida Supreme Court, known for its liberal activism,
consisting of
six Democrats, one independent and no Republicans, ruled
that Mrs.
Harris must include in the certified Florida results the
final tallies from
the corrupted hand counts.
Gov. Bush will fight in the courts and perhaps in the state
Legislature.
"Make no mistake," he said Wednesday in responding to the
justices in
Tallahassee, "the court rewrote the law. It changed the
rules, and it
did so after the election was over."
And we must fight, too.
We must first of all know this will not be over soon. We
must be in it
for the long haul and must fight in any peaceful and legal
way open to
us.
Yesterday we rested and thought and spent time with our
families and
thanked God for all he has given us. Today we must return to
the
trenches, refreshed and ready.
Ideas, all modest and obvious, and yours will be better:
Every Republican senator and congressman, every governor and
state
legislator should starting now come forward and pledge his
opposition
to the Gore attempt to steal the election. They should be
all over the
local airwaves back home, making the case against the
dishonesty that
is occurring. They might point out that most thieves have
enough
respect to rob a house when it is empty, but in this case
the thieves
are stealing while the country is home, and watching.
Every writer, scribbler, Internet Paul Revere, talker,
pundit, thinker,
essayist, voice: Come forward and speak the truth. Howl
it.
We must point out what needs be pointed out again and again
and not
ducked or hidden: The Clinton-Gore operatives are trying to
steal the
election--and it is wrong. The Democrats in their hunger for
power will
throw the men and women who protect us with their lives over
the
side--and it is wrong.
We must keep our arguments sharp. The other night Alan
Colmes
challenged Newt Gingrich: Do you really think it fair to
charge the
Democratic Party with trying to suppress military votes? Mr.
Gingrich
replied that you can see the Democratic plan in this: They
issued a
five-page memo on how to knock out military votes, which
they
assume lean Republican. There was no five-page memo on how
to
throw out the absentee ballots from Israel, which they
assume lean
Democratic.
Ever since this exchange I haven't heard anyone ask if the
Democrats
really mean to be doing what they're doing.
We must accept that the venue of the fight will change and
change
again. This all may be decided by the Florida Legislature.
Or the U.S.
Supreme Court. Or in Congress. When venues change you must
be
nimble.
We must be prepared, and learn all we can, and know all we
can, and
spread the word.
We must accept too that in spite of being spoofed and put
down and
accused of being extreme, it is not wrong to fight in this
case, it is
right. It is not irresponsible--it is the only way of being
responsible.
It is wrong to yell "Fire!" for the fun of upsetting your
neighbors. It is
right to yell "Fire!" when your neighbor's house is in
flames.
We must through e-mail and telephone calls and call-ins to
radio and
television report all of the data we are receiving, all of
the evidence
that the theft of an election is taking place day by day in
Florida.
Those on the ground in Florida, in the counting rooms, must
even more
become part of this. The one thing history needs more
of--and the
courts need, too--is first-person testimony.
Some have suggested a march. I don't know if that's a good
idea, but
it should be discussed, and soon. Perhaps a march on
Washington,
perhaps millions, perhaps dressed in black--in mourning for
an attempt
to subvert democracy. I suppose it would look like a huge
New York
dinner party, but it would also look like a people
resisting. Perhaps they
should march silently, past symbols of democracy that are
more
eloquent in their silence than we with our sound. Perhaps
there should
be placards with the names of men and women from military
bases
whose attempt to vote for their commander in chief has been
denied.
In some part of our minds we must look to the future.
To legislation that will normalize and regularize our voting
procedures,
make clear and just its rules and regulations, see to it
that a Florida
will never happen again.
A new modesty seems in order. We Americans like to brag
about how
this oldest and greatest democracy can always teach the
other, little
countries how to perform. We've been braying and sending our
vote
counters to less secure republics for years. The cocktail
parties of the
world are now having fun at our expense. They should. A
modest bow
from us seems in order.
And this idea, from a conservative activist. In January
President Bush,
as his first act in office, should announce that he will
give a complete
pardon to anyone who goes down to the FBI within 30 days
and
swears out a confession of his involvement in vote fraud and
vote
tampering in the 2000 elections. It's harder to spin history
when
history has the affidavits.
And of course we must all pray. I say this more than I do
it, and not
many of us have done it enough, which is the reason this
happened.
And after praying, consider this. There is now all over the
Internet a
quote attributed to Stalin that for so many sums up the
Florida story:
"It doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who count the
votes."
True enough at the moment. But I prefer the last words of a
more
likable lefty, Joe Hill of the Industrial Workers of the
World: "Don't
mourn--organize."
*********
DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN NOV 19, 2000 19:31:42 ET XXXXX
RELEASED: DEMOCRAT MEMO ON HOW TO DISQUALIFY MILITARY
VOTES
**World Exclusive**
Date: November 15, 2000
To: FDP Lawyer
From: Mark Herron
Subject: Overseas Absentee Ballot Review and
Protest
State and Federal law provides for the counting of
"absentee qualified electors
overseas" ballots for 10 days after the day of the election
or until November 17,
2000. Sections 101.62(7)(a), Florida Statutes defines as
"absentee qualified
elector overseas" to mean members of the Armed Forces while
in the service,
members of the merchant marine of the United States and
other citizens of the
United States, who are permanent residents of the states and
are temporarily
residing outside of the territories of the United States and
the Districts of
Columbia. These "absent qualified electors overseas" must
also be qualified and
registered as provided by law.
You are being asked to review these overseas absentee
ballots to make a
determination whether acceptance by the supervisor of
elections and/or the county
canvassing board is legal under Florida law. A challenge to
these ballots must be
made prior to the time that the ballot is removed from the
mailing envelope. The
specific statutory requirement for processing the canvass of
an absentee ballot
including of overseas absentee ballot, are set forth in
Section 101.62(2) (c)2.
Florida Statutes:
If
any elector or candidate present believes that an
absentee
ballot is illegal due to a defect apparent on the
voter's
certificate, he or she may at anytime before the ballot
is
removed from the envelope, file with the canvassing board
a
protest against the canvass of the ballot specifying the
precinct, the ballot, and the reason he or she believes
the
ballot to be illegal. A challenge based upon a defect in
the
voter's certificate may not be accepted after the ballot
has
been
removed from the mailing envelope.
The form of the voter's certificates on the absentee
ballot is set forth in
section 101.64(1), Florida Statutes. By statutory
provisions, only overseas
absentee ballots mailed with an APO, PPO, or foreign
postmark shall be considered
a ballot. See Section 101.62(7)(c). Florida
Statutes.
In reviewing these ballots you should focus on the
following:
1.
Request for overseas ballots: Determine that the voter
affirmatively requested an overseas ballot, and that the
signature on the request for an overseas ballot matches
the
signature of the elector on the registration books to
determine that the elector who requested the overseas
ballot
is
the elector registered. See Section 101.62(4)(a),
Florida
Statutes.
2.
The voter's signature: The ballot envelope must be
signed
by
the voter. The signature of the elector as the voter's
certificate should be compared with the signature of the
elector of the signature on the registration books to
determine that the elector who voted by ballot is the
elector
registered. See Section 101.68(c)x, Florida
Statutes.
3.
The ballot is properly witnessed: The absentee ballot
envelope must be witnessed by a notary or an attesting
witness over the age of eighteen years. You may note
that
these
requirements vary from the statutory language from the
Section 101.68(2)(c)1, Florida Statutes. Certain
statutory
requirements in that section were not proclaimed by the
Justice Department pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting
Rights
Act,
Sec. DE 98-13.
4.
The ballot is postmarked: With respect to absentee
ballots
mailed by absolute qualified electors overseas only
those
ballots mailed with an APO, PPO, or foreign postmark shall
be
considered valid. See Section 101.62(7)(c), Florida
Statutes.
This
statutory provision varies from rule 15-2.013(7),
Florida Administrative Code, which provides overseas
absentee
ballots may be accepted if "postmarked or signed and dated
no
later
than the date of the federal election."
5.
The elector has not already voted (duplicate ballot). In
some
instances, an absent qualified elector overseas may have
received two absentee ballots and previously submitted
another ballot. No elector is entitled to vote twice.
(Please
insert appropriate Fl. xxx.)
To assist your review, we have attached the
following:
1. A review Federal Postal regulations relating to FPO's
and PPO's.
2. A protest form to be completed with respect to each
absentee ballot
challenged.
3. Overseas Ballot Summary of Definitions.
Revised
Overseas Ballot Summary of Definitions
There are 3 different types of overseas ballots that are
valid for return at the
counties provided they are postmarked on or before November
7th.
1. Federal Write-In ballot
Must be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and
be
registered under State law.
Must
have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in
writing and completely filled out request (including
signature)
Must
comply with State laws applying to regular absentee
ballots (such as registration requirements, notification
requirements, etc.)
Ballot contains only Federal races, and is considered to be
a
"backup" system if the regular state absentee ballot fails
to
arrive.
The
intent of the voter in casting the ballot should govern.
In
other words, minor variations in spelling candidate or
party
names should be disregarded in ballot counting so long
as
the intention of the voter can be ascertained.
Must
be postmarked as an APO, FPO, or MPO in a foreign
country or at a foreign post office.
2. Florida Advance Ballot
Sent out in advance of a regular General Election ballot
with
state
and Federal candidates listed.
Must
be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and be
registered under State law.
Must
comply with State laws applying to regular absentee
ballots (such as registration requirements, notarization
requirements, etc.)
Must
have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in
writing and completely filled out request (including
signature)
Sent
prior to the second (or October) primary elections to
all
permanent overseas registered voters.
Must
comply with all State laws regarding signatures, witness
requirements, etc.
Must
be postmarked at the APO, FPO or MPO in a foreign
country or at a foreign post office.
3. Regular Overseas Ballot
Sent after the second (or October) primary elections to
all
permanent overseas registered voters and voters requesting
an
overseas ballot from the county.
Must
be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and be
registered under State law.
Must
comply with State laws applying to regular absentee
ballots (such as registration requirements, notarization
requirements, etc.)
Must
have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in
writing and completely filled out request (including
signature)
Full
ballot with all candidates listed.
Likely would take precedence over any advance or federal
ballot also returned.
Must
comply with all State laws regarding signatures, witness
requirements, etc.
Ballot is designed by the county.
Must
be postmarked at an APO, FPO, or MPO in a foreign
country or at a foreign post office.
Below are the definitions for points of origin and
postmark that are valid for
military overseas ballots:
1. APO (Army Post Office) -- A branch of the designated
USPS civilian post
office, which falls under the jurisdiction of the postmaster
of either New York
City or San Francisco, that serves either Army or Airforce
personnel.
2. FPO (Fleet Post Office) -- A branch of the designated
USPS civilian post
office, which falls under the jurisdiction of the postmaster
of either New York
City or San Francisco, that serves Coast Guard, Navy, or
Marine Corps personnel.
3. MPO (Military Post Office) -- A branch of a U.S. civil
post office, operated
by the Army, Navy, Airforce, or Marine Corps to serve
military personnel overseas
or aboard ships.
4. Military Post Office Cancellation -- A postmark that
contains the post office
name, state, ZIP Cope, and month, day, and year that the
mail xxx was cancelled.
Protest of Overseas Absentee Ballot
As provided in Section 101.68(2)(c)(2), Florida Statutes.
I, as an elector in
__________ County, Florida, hereby protest against the
canvass of the overseas
absentee ballot described below:
County:
____________________________________________________
Precinct:
__________________________________________________
The Ballot:
________________________________________________
Name of Voter:
_____________________________________________
Address of Voter:
__________________________________________
Reason for rejection:
______________________________________
___ Lack of voter signature
___ Lack of affirmative request for absentee ballot
___ Request for absentee ballot not fully filled out
___ Signature on absentee ballot request does not match
signature on registration card or on ballot
___ Voter signature on envelope does not match signature
on
registration card
___ Inadequate witness certification
___ Late postmark (indicate date of actual postmark)
___ Domestic postmark (including Puerto Rico, Guam,
etc.)
___ No postmark
___ Voter had previously voted in this election
___ Other
__________________________________
Signature of Person Filing Protest
__________________________________
Print Name
Letters:
1. Proof that words on the Internet live forever.
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 20:12:41 -0500
From: PHenderson@snl.com
To: sglanger@vela.acs.oakland.edu
Subject: Comment on an old reader's comment
[ The following text is in the
"iso-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the
"US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed
incorrectly. ]
Dear Mr. Langer,
Lord knows how I came across this, but in your 1995 May
issue a reader
writes asking your condemnation or right-wing lunacy,
offering the following
as an example (excerpt from text of letter):
I want to get my contribution to the next issue of the
Stevey Press to you
as soon as possible. It's a quote from North Carolina state
representative
Henry Aldridge. Aldridge was speaking during a house
committee meeting. He
was speaking in support of eliminating money that North
Carolina currently
provides to fund abortions for women who are raped and
become pregnant. He
was claiming that women who are rapedcannot get pregnant.
Here is what the
North Carolina Republicansaid: "... The facts show that
people who are
raped, who are truly raped,the juices don't flow, the body
functions don't
work, and they don't get pregnant."
The reader thought it was obvious beyond question that the
state rep's claim
was absurd, and that the rep fell into a certain category,
namely right-wing
lunatics. As a right-wing lunatic, I object to your reader's
thought process
and invite you to consider whether there is not a need to
watch out for and
educate one's followers about the danger of stereotyped
thinking. Probably
90% of the harmful ideas people hold are transmitted by mob
psychology:
People are told that certain features identify an idea as
lunatic (e.g. a
minor official from North Carolina believes it), and that
anyone who doesn't
recognize these give-away features (to say nothing of those
who actually
believe the idea) is an idiot if not a menace. In the
case before us, the
writer tacitly invokes stereotypes of southerners as
nincompoops, and of
religious believers as nincompoops, the two classes
overlapping. And the
writer feels a glow of smug self-righteousness and a
comeraderie with other
sophisticates who share his disdain for religious rubes.
I invite you to consider that there is no obvious logical
absurdity in the
idea that the body attempts to hinder the penetration and
successful
transmission of semen during an act of forced intercourse.
From an
evolutionary as well as a psychological point of view it
makes a certain
amount of sense. There are many stranger things in human and
animal biology.
Consider that women athletes who train too hard lose their
period, as if the
body were forgetting it belonged to a woman. Feminists may
not like the
idea, or perhaps they do, but it seems to be true. The state
representative
who recited the rape-nonconception theory as fact
undoubtedly did not make
it up out of thin air but came across it somewhere. Whether
it is true or
not I have no idea, but this I do know: I would lay 5 to 1
that no
gynocologist would give us a straight answer to the question
owing to the
intensity of political sentiment surrounding the
issue. I still remember
seeing a prominent health official, decked out in a white
lab coat so as to
impress the viewer with his scientific credentials,
scornfully telling the
newsman it was nonsense to believe you could get AIDs from a
blood
transfusion. This was many years ago, and we have learned
better since, to
our horror. But we should have had the good sense to
distrust the MD in the
first place. As the philosopher Wittgenstein said,
when a scientist tells
you something that doesn't seem to make sense, don't dumbly
nod your head in
assent in subservience to the god of science, but rather
demand that he
clarify and state his grounds. I admit to being a
contrarian, and I love
nothing better than seeing the myths of the educated
exploded. (Seeing the
myths of the uneducated exploded strikes me as equivalent to
shooting fish
in a barrel, and rather cruel.)
In the example I have cited, the reader felt himself
qualified to judge
medical nonsense, and, to make things worse, was willing to
let the regional
background of the speaker weigh in the evidentiary process.
Finally, he
evidently felt entitled to a "Here, here!" for his unmasking
of yet another
case of abysmal ignorance. I suggest that this whole
syndrome is itself very
dangerous, and is used by those who control the culture to
create premature
dismissals of ideas that challenge the culture. So I hope
you will add to
your agenda the aim of combatting this form of refutation by
stereotype.
Thanks for reading! And good luck.
Peter Henderson
SNL Securities
p 804.977.1888 x418
phenderson@snl.com
2. Matt writes;
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:50:07 -0700 (MST)
From: Matt Birkholz <matt@birkholz.chandler.az.us>
To: LANGER STEVEN C <sglanger@Oakland.edu>
Subject: lastcall
> From: LANGER STEVEN C
<sglanger@Oakland.edu>
> Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:39:17 -0500 (EST)
> [...]
>
> a two parter
>
> "Is the US energy policy sufficeint?
>From what little I know about it, it seems less than
laissez faire.
> Is the process for electing our president
sufficient?"
Well... it succeeds more often than it fails,
unfortunately. I think we
should call this one a "toss up" and try again in
2004.
--MAtt
3. Mike Redman writes
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 21:20:32 -0500
From: Renee and Michael Redman <rsredman@uncg.edu>
To: sglanger@vela.acs.oakland.edu
Subject: The Election
Hey Steve,
Long time no write. I hope all is going well out in
the great
Northwest. Believe it or not, we actually have a
winter storm warning
for heavy snow here in central North Carolina. I can't
wait.
Well, now about the election, or the lack thereof.
Obviosly this whole
thing is pretty much a statistical tie. The next step
should be to put
both Gore and Bush through some physical challenge. I
think arm
wrestling, or an army type obstical course would be
nice. Of course the
ultimate challenge could be an old fashioned duel.
Bring out the old
time black powered dueling pistols, the ones that were quite
unreliable,
ten or twenty pases and fire. However, if Gore lost,
then the Democrats
would want the best two out of three.
Oh well, just a thought. At least the whole mess
would end in some kind
of finallity.
Sorry about the spelling errors. Happy
holidays.
Mike Redman
Quote(s) of the month:
"If our country stands for anything, its that every vote is
sacred"
--Al Gore (Nov. 16), speaking of the Florida election
results, and demanding a recount in the three largest
Dem counties, while denying that one is need for the rest of
the state and having his legal team invalidate the ballots
from overseas military installations.
"We are going to have a very stark difference in this
election between me and my opponenet at the presidential
level as to whether we continue the policies that have
worked or we go a different direction. Gov. Bush's policies
are basically against every gun safety measure and for
concealed weapons in every setting, including church, and
that is a very stark difference between us. "
-- Hillary Clinton, Sept 2000, Edgerton Mass fundraiser.
[The reader may be confused here about what race Hillary
thinks she's in. I was.]
Fix of the month:
"Can the country and Congress support whomever becomes our
next President, and if not what can be done about
it?
News:
Washington;
1. Olympia, Oct 2: Hundreds of environmentalists
protested outside the state campaign headquarters of the Big
Oil presidential candidate.They were protesting the plans of
the candidate to drill for oil on the burial grounds of the
U'Wa indians along the Columbia river - to which the indians
threatened mass suicide.
Another Bush protest? No. Said protester Kim Marks of Al
Gore, "This is not the kind of president we need. We support
Ralph Nader."
2. Seattle, Nov. 30: 140 protestors were arrested in the
anniversary of last years World Trade Organization in the
city.They were all cited for "failure to disperse" but thay
argued that there was no way for them to disperse becuase
the Seattle PD had them surrounded with mace wielding cops.
They were released on Thursday after one-day's detention.
The bus tunnels were also evacuated when pepper spray was
released in them, the cops and protesters accusing
each other of the release.
3.Olympia Dec. 1: Finally the decision is made. Maria
Cantwell (D) beat Slade Gorton (R) for US Senate by a scant
2000 votes. This means that the US Senate will be a 50/50
split if Bush wins the White House.
4. Seattle, Dec. 2: Next week, TA's and graders at the
UW-Seattle are set to strike, as they have finally unionized
and are demanding better pay and health care.
Wisconsin;
1. Madison, Oct.30: The 2000-2002 undergrad application
brochure to the Univ. of Wisconsin shows a group of students
cheering at a Badger football game. In the majority of white
faces, one black male is seen in the lower left of the
picture. The problem is, he was not really there. The
original cover shot was all white, and admins thought that
would send the wrong message (ie that Madison is not
diverse). So, a 1994 photo of Diallo Shabazz was inserted
digitally into the group of more recent students to create
the proper "color" balance.
2. Hartford, 1 Dec: The constitutional conventions of
probable cause, protection against unreasonable search and
seizure, and prohibition of self incrimination, don't seem
to apply to students in state public schools. My High School
Sr. niece informs me that at school today, they had a "lock
down", a quaint term borrowed from penitentories, where all
lockers, back packs and cars of students were
searched.
Ed: No doubt next week, solitary confinement.
New York;
1. SUNY NYC, 1 Nov: The Univ tried to have a picnic
honoring baseballs first black athlete Jackie Robinson. But
black students protested, claiming that the word "picnic"
refers to the lynching of blacks. Actually it comes from the
French "piquenique" meaning an outdoor gathering where in
people bring their own food. So the posters advertising the
event were changed to say "outing". You guessed it, the gays
demonstrated. In the end it was called the Jackie Robinson
outdoor food event.
NYC, 30 Oct.: Gulf World magazine reports that it has
proof that CBS Sports is adding taped songbird sounds to its
"live" golf broadcasts. Expert birdwatchers noted that the
birdsong heard was always the same whether the tournament
was in Florida, California or Hawaii. Quite a flight for a
sparrow.
Rhode Island;
1. Warwick, Nov: A six foot tall statue of Mr. Potato Head
near City Hall was ordered to be taken down after
complaintes were lodged that it "appeard" racist. The
statue, which was dark skinned, with very white teeth,
dressed in shorts and a Hawaian shirt welcomed people to the
town. Complaints said, however, that it was reminiscnet of
black "lawn boys" and as such had slavery overtones.
Washington D.C.
1. Nov.: While Al Gore and company proclaim that
Bush/Cheny are both "big oil" men and hence would destroy
the environment, a little known fact is that Cheny ran an
oil company that got not one, not two, but three awards from
EPA and in 1996 was named a "Green Lights Corporate Partner
of the Year" for having exceptionally clean operations. In
1996, Al Gore himself presented Cheny with the Hammer Award
for corporate citizenship.
2. Nov: The Dept of Ag. has released this late breaking
alert. Henceforth, Swiss Cheese holes will have to average
3/8" diameter rather than the previous 11/16" guideline to
be Grade A. Take your tape measure to the Grocery store.
3. Nov. : The Ag department says it needs more $$ for its
foodstamp program, but an evil Rep. controlled House is
relunctant to give it to them until the Dept. can find the
missing $5 billion that it has not been able to account for
since last year.
Tuvalu:
1. Nov.: A small island in the S. Pacific, Tuvalu
consists of nine islands and was supposed to be flooding due
to global warming. In fact, they were supposed to be
submerged by now. Instead, sea level there has dropped 2.5
inches, and the docks and piers for the fishing boats are no
longer long enough in low tide. The 11,000 people now want
to join the United Nations, where it is said they will ask
for aid to extend their fishing piers, which they did not do
earlier becuase they were told the isalnds would flood. Now
costs are higher than they can afford.
Net News:
© Steve Langer, 1995-2000
|
