In the media industry, that type of article is called a "puff piece." Basically a press release under a byline.

The software that Diebold uses is considered proprietary and a cooperative Congress has made sharing it a Federal offense. So we have to rely on Diebold's own internal investigation to turn up 'vote tampering.'

I wonder whose machine produced this result:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=456&sid=972062

Still waiting to find out about boobie Kate.

We need voting reform, but I worry about all of us on the same faulted system too. Right now it's up to the locals, it's also a real mess.

I think 90% of the problems are the electroinc DieBold type systems in that there is just no chance for a fair recount with all the tampering that can happen.

EDITED: for missing words.

Tampering is possible for sure. But how could it be so vast and well-organized as to swing an election in the desired direction? How could the conspirators place agents in every single precinct and be sure it will go their way? Seems to me it could only happen in a recount and then only if a very select few precincts participated. I mean, if you knew you needed 7000 more votes to turn the election around, how would you be able to get just that number and spread it around all the precincts in just such a way so that all of them escape scrutiny?

First things first. Before we start making decisions and adjustments, we need to finish the task of asking questions and gathering information. Now, who is Boobie Kate and moreimportantly, what does she look like?

I concur.

Sorry to disappoint guys but I think techweenie's referring to Katherine Harris.

Edit: Ah, now I see you two weren't serious. I'll go back to being quiet.

Ah yes, from the interview she had with the little fascist, Shawn Hannity a bit ago, where she was pulling her shoulders back and thrusting her womanhood out for the camera, to the point of standing slightly sideways to the camera.

Unfortunately for her, Bush II didn't support her campaign because she wasn't socialist enough for him.

That's all I want. That is to me the best we're going to get.

Yes, machines can be tampered with, there will never, ever, ever be a perfect election, but it's also possible to make it less likely (e.g., ATM WITH paper for banks/customers to ensure all is accurate). But without paper (what a completely moronic and stupid thing to design, it HAD to be intentional, there is no way an ATM manufacturer wouldn't suggest paper!) tampering would be a whole lot easier and impossible to uncover and with the nature of politics, I don't give a ***** what "party" the bastards belong to, we all know power is like a drug.....

This is ALL I want. Thanks for sharing there are actually some machines like this.

From a voter point of view, I want to have some semblence of confidence my vote is counted accurately.... I like the view that you had....that's cool.

So am I to understand that I will not be seeing a picture of a political woman with boobies?

Americans, we have been mislead again.