Thursday, December 04, 2003




The other's just for decoration.

Molly Ivins Endorses Howard Dean

Molly Ivins Endorses Howard Dean

"I'm for Howard Dean -- because he's going to win."

Paul Krugman Under Fire From Right-Wing Attack Squad Over Exposing Faulty Voting Machines

Paul Krugman Under Fire From Right-Wing Attack Squad Over Exposing Faulty Voting Machines

Paul Krugman at Syracuse University Nov. 20, 2003
photo by Vicki L. Trojnor
see related story

The fearfully guilty in right-wing journalism are running wild...fangs fully exposed..ready
to cover their masters' filthy tracks; tepid drool dripping from snorting angry snouts.

In the National Review, the lame-excuse-machine Donald Luskintakes over where the 3rd-grade-level name-caller Alex Beam recently left off. They are becoming the tag-team of shame.

I know Paul Krugman MUST be doing something right to have these attack-dogs at his throat (or should I say his writing hand) 24/7.

Bless you, Professor Krugman. When they (let's call them 'Beam') call you "crackers" and insinuate that you have a "personality disorder", you just know you are getting to the exposure-core of their hoped-for deceit.

When another journalist (let's call him 'Luskin') refers to the other cad's debasement of Krugman's very honor and uses it to support a new attack upon him.....well....Professor Krugman most definitely has "gotten to them".

(It's good for Al Beam and Donald Luskin that today's dreadful cads who attack a gentleman's honor are
no longer challenged to the dueling field. Makes you almost long for the old days, though). we have Beam, then Luskin....
'ad hominem flesh-rip' meets 'piss-warm excuse and blustering blizzards of blurred reason'.
Some tag team.

Look at Luskin's utterly-pitiful excuse-making:

From the National Review article: ----
"..Krugman just can't resist reminding us that Republican "Orrin Hatch...recently announced that one of his aides had improperly accessed sensitive Democratic computer files that were leaked to the press. Krugman fails to mention, however, exactly what those leaked "sensitive Democratic computer files" contained. It turns out they were horrifically embarrassing staff memoranda revealing the hand-in-glove strategic partnership between Democratic senators and various lobbying organizations dedicated to blocking President Bush's judicial nominees (according to one memo, "most of Bush's nominees are nazis")...."

A theft justified what the stolen item contained?
Oh, I don’t think that would fly in any American court of law.
It was a theft…
Luskin justifies theft.

From the National Review article:----
"And according to yesterday's Wall Street Journal, there wasn't even anything "improper" about the aide's access to the files. They were all just sitting on a shared server set up by Democratic senator Pat Leahy's IT staff — a server, it seems, just like the one Diebold used."

Luskin again justifies theft by attempting to rationalize it away.
This, to me, is indicative of a journalist with greatly- compromised integrity.

From the National Review article:----
"... he brings up the infamous 2000 Florida presidential election — that wellspring of so many beloved liberal myths — citing the "'felon purge' that inappropriately prevented many citizens from voting in the 2000 presidential election." But according to Peter Kirsanow, a member of the US Commission on Civil Rights who wrote a piece on the subject..."

Luskin totally insults (and alienates) the majority of Americans who voted in Election 2000 by
categorizing a genuine occurrence as a “myth”---and a “liberal myth” to boot.
There are far more Centrist Americans than there are those on the far left.
In essence, it appears that Luskin is merely preaching to his choir.
I notice that the only “evidence” Luskin presents in this instance is from Peter Kirsanow, the
partisan shill who was forced upon the Civil Rights Commission with a lawsuit brought by the Bush
administration and their interests.

Speaking of preaching to the choir, even the choir loft was full when Professor Krugman spoke at S.U. in November. The numbers of interested and concerned Americans are growing.
photo by Vicki L. Trojnor

From the National Review article:-----
"....Krugman continues by asserting that "An analysis of Diebold software by researchers at Johns Hopkins and Rice Universities found it both unreliable and subject to abuse." Krugman fails to mention that Avi Rubin, the computer scientist who led the Johns Hopkins analysis team, has confessed that he held stock options in VoteHere Inc., a Diebold competitor, and was a member of VoteHere's advisory board...."

There goes Luskin again - attacking the honor of yet another gentleman.
When all else fails, ATTACK!
Would we expect that a person who knew nothing about voting mechanisms to be APT to serve on a
voting-mechanism ANALYSIS team?


Did Luskin not mention Avi Rubin is a computer scientist?

Luskin is impugning someone’s honor again.
Good thing the art of the duel is passé.

From the National Review article:----
"Early this year Bev Harris, who is writing a book on voting machines, found Diebold software — which the company refuses to make available for public inspection, on the grounds that it's proprietary — on an unprotected server, where anyone could download it."

Luskin says: "My investigations confirm that a Diebold server was indeed unprotected for a period..."

Look, Mr. Luskin - - if it happened, then it happened. Yes?

Mr. Luskin feels the need to attack Paul Krugman for ever having revealed the quirks in the system.
Ergo, Luskin is seemingly afraid for you to know that these machines are fallible and susceptible to fraudulent tampering.
Moreover, Luskin seems to want you to FORGET that human nature can cause great temptation when hominids lust for power.
Apparently, It’s worth a vicious attack upon a fellow journalist and a gentleman to cover the paymaster’s tracks.


NOTE: Bev Harris gives a great interview to Buzzflash
about the reality-potential of the most fraudulent election-theft to ever be orcestrated....yes...even more fraudulent than 2000.