When the Spanish online voting company SCYTL bought the largest vote processing corporation in the United States, it also acquired the means of manufacturing the outcome of the 2012 election. For SOE, the Tampa based corporation purchased by SCYTL in January, supplies the election software which records, counts, and reports the votes of Americans in 26 states–900 total jurisdictions–across the nation.
As the largest election results reporting company in the US, SOE provides reports right down to the precinct level. But before going anywhere else, those election returns are routed to individual, company servers where the people who run them “…get ‘first look’ at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.” In short, “this redirects results …to a centralized privately held server which is not just for Ohio, but national; not just USA-based, but global.”
And although the votes will be cast in hometown, American precincts on Election Day, with the Barcelona-based SCYTL taking charge of the process, they will be routed and counted overseas.
SCYTL itself is a leader in internet voting technology and in 2010 was involved in modernizing election systems for the midterm election in 14 American states.
"The masses... do not conceive any ideas, sound or unsound. They only choose between the ideologies developed by the intellectual leaders of mankind. But their choice is final and determines the course of events. If they prefer bad doctrines, nothing can prevent disaster."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/26/2012 06:48PM by txcup.
"The masses... do not conceive any ideas, sound or unsound. They only choose between the ideologies developed by the intellectual leaders of mankind. But their choice is final and determines the course of events. If they prefer bad doctrines, nothing can prevent disaster."
It seems that whenever President Obama's opponents need a villain to offset the damage that's being inflicted on our country by people like the ubiquitous slime-ball Koch brothers - or Newt benefactors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson or "aspirin-between-the knees" Foster Friess or sleazy hedge fund manager scumbags, Paul Singer and John Paulson - they will inevitably invoke the only name that comes to mind - the only billionaire they don't like - George Soros.
"The masses... do not conceive any ideas, sound or unsound. They only choose between the ideologies developed by the intellectual leaders of mankind. But their choice is final and determines the course of events. If they prefer bad doctrines, nothing can prevent disaster."
You don't keep a child molestor in the kindergarten classroom because your options to replace him are religious nuts or codgers. You get rid of him.
You don't keep a war criminal and constitution raper in office because you don't like the options to replace him. You simply replace him because he's a fuking war criminal.
Ron Paul is NOT a war criminal. In fact he's been one of the few who has worked actively to reinstate constitutional checks on the powers of the presidency, has worked with progressives to try to hold criminals accountable and has a record of opposing illegal, unconstitutional and immoral wars and military actions.
You want to keep Obama in office? Fine. But don't bitch when he continues to be a total asshat, further solidifies the uinitary executave powers, ignores the constitution, sends us into yet another illegal war, continues to torture, assinate civilians and US citizens, disregards civil liberties and basic constitutional freedoms and further empowers his corporate masters.
We're running out of options and if you're okay with scum like Obama then you're part of the problem. You may as well campaign to get Bush back in office.
Paul's policies are the least racist of any of the candidates.
Regardless of his own personal views (which have not been shown to be racist and a president of the NAAPC has publicly stated that Paul is not recist and has been his friend for 20 years) Paul holds the oath of office he serves higher than anything but the Constitutional prinicpals he's sworn to defend.
If your excuse for supporting a war criminal (a man who would kill women and children with robots and brag about it) is that you refuse to support a "racist" to replace him then pick another candidate. Vote third party and cast a vote against the two-party system.
So, so far I got that Cas wants a racist for president, Mac wants a baby killer, I want a logic professor, and AL Brigade wants a European -- ANY European, but preferably the more European, the better.
What I want to know is . . . where are those damn aliens when you need them?
Sure, they can do little tricks like shut down the launch capabilities of a few nuclear missile silos, but why can't they do something that might really make a difference -- like give 'we, the people' a leader worthy of us?
No. He's in second place in the GOP race and closing the gap quickly now that delegates are being voted in. Couple that with the chance that Romney might not cinch the nomination on the first vote. Many, if not a majority, of the delegates selected to vote for Romney in the first round are not actually Romney suporters. See the Santorum delegates who have teamed up with the Paul campaign.
Paul actually has a good chance if certain things happen... especially if Romney doesn't get the 1144 delegates needed to just take the nomination... and there's still a chance that those things can happen.
However, a McKinney or Nader-type candidacy would be the same as in the past. I fully support them and that's been my vote. But now we have a chance to get a true anti-war candidate who has a very strong constitutional record.
Many of you have gotten on my case in the past for being a purist when it comes to voting. "You can't agree with a candidate 100%" some have said many times.
I'd like to throw that back yer way this time because I took it to heart.
Paul is anti-war, anti-intervention.
He's anti-torture.
He has a log record of working with the likes of McKinney and Kucinich and the Progressive caucus.
He has opposed anything that didn't have a constitutional basis, including some stuff that he morally suported but counldn't, as a rep, support.
Paul's foreign policy is the only sane policy coming out of DC right now.
Paul has the orginization and dedication made up of people of all political stripes.
When was the last time you heard Obama talk about getting rid of the Partiot Act?
IMO, and not talking about the many fine third party candidates who we may agree with but don't have a real chance, Paul is in a position to become the Republican nominee for President if he can win the convnention in Tampa.
I see no reason not to support him against Romney and Obama.
I don't WANT a "baby killer", I WANT Paul Wellstone.
But he's dead.
In his place I WANT Bernie Sanders, but he's not running.
I would still accept Jerry Brown, but he's got his hands full with California.
I have NEVER gotten what I WANT in the White House.
(a Liberal)
And I doubt I ever will.
Me neither Mac. I'm trying to look at this election pragmatically as the Dems and liberals have been begging me to do for the past four elections.
"Why did you vote for Nader? You know you just got Bush elected right? You don't have to agree with Gore/Kerry/Obama 100%." blah blah blah.
But now we don't even have a "lesser evil" choice. It's Obama (greater evil) or Romney (retarded greater evil).
There's one last hope that Romney can be driven out by Paul (lesser good) and at least we will have the chance to vote against corporate control, more wars, torture, etc, etc.
"There's one last hope that Romney can be driven out by Paul (lesser good) and at least we will have the chance to vote against corporate control, more wars, torture, etc, etc." -Cas
...and swap it for having our entire education system pillaged and destroyed, the environment raped and destroyed, exploding the numbers of homeless, public lands sold off, our food becoming much less safe, decent wages flushed down the toilet...
“I am absolutely convinced this is the only way to prosperity,” Paul said. “If we want jobs we have to get the government out of our way.”ABC News
That's just asinine.
Where on planet Earth is there "prosperity" where government has gotten "out of the way"?
News flash Pondy. The educational system has already been pillaged. The Dept of Edu has been used as a political tool. The Arts, music, extra ciricular classes, etc, have been gutted. School systems are dropping skilled teachers like flies and hiring green grads on the cheap.
The environment has been raped and destroyed already and the EPA acts only as a guardian protector for the corporate interests..
exploding the numbers of homeless, public lands sold off, our food becoming much less safe, decent wages flushed down the toilet. All have already happened. The Federal government has helped the corporations, as people, gain more rights than actual people and thus use the American People as tools for profit.
isn't it time to revoke corporate personhood?
Where on earth has there been prosperity when corporations control the government?
"The Dept of Edu has been used as a political tool. The Arts, music, extra ciricular classes, etc, have been gutted. School systems are dropping skilled teachers like flies and hiring green grads on the cheap." -Cas
So rather than actually fund them properly so all that can be put back and supported... we just do away with public education altogether. I see.
"The environment has been raped and destroyed already and the EPA acts only as a guardian protector for the corporate interests.." -Cas
So rather than strengthen and actually enforce the protections that are already in place... we just remove all reins on industry to pillage and rape unhindered at all. I see.
"exploding the numbers of homeless, public lands sold off, our food becoming much less safe, decent wages flushed down the toilet. All have already happened." -Cas
So rather than fix what's wrong with any of the systems in charge of those things that are still helping millions... we just let the wealthy and corporations take it all over and help people out of the goodness of their stockholders. I see.
"Where on earth has there been prosperity when corporations control the government?" -Cas
No one is saying that corporations should own the government. No one is saying that's a good thing. But how is the problem of corporations controlling the government going to be solved by doing away with the government and letting corporations own and control everything with no governance?
NO, we don't do away with public education. We allow the states to dictate and fund their own school systems. Instaed of send cash to the Feds and only getting part of it back we allow the states to keep the money and dictate their own cirriculum.
THat may lead to some states like Kentucky totally failing but it will allow states like Cali and Oregon to get rid of standardization and move ahead with alternative schooling at the public levels and institute better systems for the kids. Once the success stories sart coming out (especiall from places like ORegon where the people are primed to move on this) the rest of the country will follow.
As for the environment, we allow economic environmentalism. We won't have the hurdels to suing the hell out of corporations like Boise Paper, the logging companies and Monsanto. The People will be able to press massive actions against these companies that would have otherwise been protected by the EPA and federal laws. We gut the massive polluters to send a clear message to others that it won't be tollerated. Groups like Greenpeace, Sierra Club the WWF will be able to put together class actions against the polluters and farmers and other land owners will have recourse against them as well. What we had in place has been gutted and abused. Having the EPA as a cabnet level dept hasn't worked as the "rules" they have can be modified by a president who isn't interested in environmental protections. It would be great if every president cared as much as Teddy Roseveldt but that's just not the case. When the oil companies elect their man to dictate the standards (see arsnic in the drinking water) we all lose and the EPA has enabled more polution than it has curbed.
The corporations, without corporate personhood protections will be unable to control as much as they have in the past. It's high time we revoke personhood and allow communities and states to deal with these problems on a local level. We've seen the War on Poverty become a War on the Poor. We can't allow that to continue. If we continue to carry on with the status quo it will.
We're not talking about "doing away with government" we're talking about reempowering the local communities and states to deal with the abusers and the issues. If we could get to a point again where massive corporations have to apply for state charters and meet their guidelines to do business there we will see an end to some of the worst abuses by business interests.
What we have now hasn't worked no matter how altruistic. We need a total change. We need to end the system of pay-to-play from teh top down and we need to dismantle the departments that have become beurocratic nightmares standing in the way of the jobs they were created to get done.
If we open the doors to new solution then new solutions will arise. If we continue on the same tired and filed path then the problems will persist.
The problem with those federal agencies you and Paul want to get rid of is that they've been corrupted, not that they're inherently bad. Transferring those responsibilities to the states will not get rid of the corruption. You're still going to have the same problem.
The answer should never be to throw the baby out with the bathwater; the answer should always be to clean up the bathwater (or the baby).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is better to see what is about to befall us and to resist than to retreat into the fantasies embraced by a nation of the blind." – Chris Hedges”
"NO, we don't do away with public education. We allow the states to dictate and fund their own school systems. Instaed of send cash to the Feds and only getting part of it back we allow the states to keep the money and dictate their own cirriculum." -Cas
What's the freaking point of even being a "country" then if we, as a "country", are going to let regions all over it decide such basic civil responsibilities as education? So if Kentucky wants to do away with, say, the teaching of evolution in all science classes and replace it with studies of the first book of Genesis, that's an acceptable sacrifice and we just have to write off the students unlucky enough to have been born in such deluded backwaters? Bummer for them?
This is my big problem with Libertarian thinking. They seem perfectly willing to "sacrifice" the weakest, most powerless of a group to supposedly and hypothetically strengthen freedom for everyone else.
That's the way our country is set up. TO allow states sovereingty under the contract of the Union.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it empower the Federal government to control education, medicine, religion (or lack thereof).
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
10th amendment. Pretty important.
If Kentucky legislatures think they can get rid of science they are welcome to try. I don't think they would be able to. At worst they would be trying to teach creationism in a science class instead of social studies.
Getting rid of the Dept of Education would not "sacrifice" anyone. Hell, with the state of public education now we would see an improvement across the board.
New and innovative ideas could be tried, the schools would not be tied into things like federal food programs that feed kids poisonous lunches or overdose them on sugar.
I think that the innovations in education that would arise from unshackling schools from the dead weight of the Dept of Education would be worth any horror stories that may come out of it. It sure can't get much worse than it is already.
The goal should be making education better, raising the quality, not homogenizing it and pandering to the lowest common denomenator.
competition between states has been lost. competition brings out the best in people. they work to make the world better for their fellow man - with the highest quality and lowest cost. if they don't, they lose to the guy that does. it's a beautiful system when allowed to function.
under federal control complacency is rewarded and progress is punished. health care needs the same errr medicine
"The masses... do not conceive any ideas, sound or unsound. They only choose between the ideologies developed by the intellectual leaders of mankind. But their choice is final and determines the course of events. If they prefer bad doctrines, nothing can prevent disaster."
If we're going to continue to reject a universal single payer health care system then the states and communities should be freed to set up their own versions.
Sometimes government programs are a good thing... but imagine if the Federal Government controled all fire depts...
"I think that the innovations in education that would arise from unshackling schools from the dead weight of the Dept of Education would be worth any horror stories that may come out of it." -Cas
See what I mean?
"It sure can't get much worse than it is already." - Every Republican Who Ever Wanted To Completely F*ck Over The Poor And Middle Class By Injecting Corporate, Profit Driven Control Over Some Particular Government Program Cas
"If we're going to continue to reject a universal single payer health care system then the states and communities should be freed to set up their own versions." -Cas
"Freed"? What's stopping them from doing that now?
Funding for public schools comes from the federal government after states send their money to the feds. It's how the poor states can continue to suck funds they don't have.
If there are horror stories that come out of it they really can't be any worse than what's happening now. Lock downs, abuse and fraud, metal detectors in schools, kids crammed into classrooms without any supervision, teachers being paid total crap, etc, etc.
Why would we support an educational system that doesn't actually teach kids anything?
