The Bold, The Numerous, The Dumbasses

I can actually HEAR oxygen being wasted......

From the "Citizens For Mandatory IQ Testing For Our Public Officials" Department:

Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 10:19:22 -0700
From: "Sallie & Welling Clark" <mail@holdenhouse.com>
To: chuckherrin.com
Subject: Voter fraud accusations

Dear Mr. Herrin,

I recently became aware of your website, "Hack the Vote" where you make allegations about my 2001 City Council race:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm

Figure 3: Election summary report – before.

Pay attention to District 3. Here we have Sallie Clark in District 3 winning by a 2/3 majority. But let’s say that for this scenario, Sallie’s daughter is my ex, or she supports gay marriage, or maybe she’s against deficit spending. Whatever – let’s say maybe she’s a Pinko Commie and must be stopped, so let’s have some fun…..

*Note – I do not actually know Sallie Clark or any of these election participants, and therefore cannot speak to her character. Again, this is just a demonstration.*
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to say that I am unappreciative of the way you have portrayed my win against incumbent Linda Barley in a 2001 City Council race. I also do not appreciate your portrayal of my character while admittedly, you say, you do not know me. Well, sir, it is clear you do not know me, my stances on issues such as gay marriage and deficit spending, and I take great offense to your thought that I would have ties to the Communist party. I am a life-long Republican. I won my race as a neighborhood advocate against the development community who not only endorsed Mrs. Barley, but financed her campaign. To infer that I could have fixed the vote when I was not in office at the time, is arbitrary and capricious. According to your website, it appears that you do not live in Colorado, therefore, why would you choose Colorado, and a Colorado Springs City Council race, to make your point, both of which you admittedly say you know nothing about. I take accusations against me regarding election fraud very seriously.

You lose credibility when you attack my character, my stance on issues and infer that I won a City Council election by voter fraud.

I await your response.

Sallie Clark

A: (What in the hell is she talking about?  Did she READ it?)

Mrs. Clark,

First, I would like to apologize for the misunderstanding. If you would like to know why your race was selected, it's because to do the demonstration I needed an example that would be easy to follow. The first race only had one candidate, the second had three, and the third race had two. That is the one I chose because it would be easy to show changes in a two-candidate race, while the demonstration would have been awkward with one or three candidates.

I'm not sure how "but let's say for this scenario" and "cannot speak to her character. Again, this is just a demonstration" gets turned into "allegations", but quite clearly you don't understand the point of the exercise, so I will attempt to explain it to you.

I went OUT OF MY WAY in the example to say that I had chosen a random sample database and that this in NO WAY reflects the results of an actual election. The quote that YOU INCLUDE below QUITE CLEARLY states that I don't know ANYONE involved in this sample race and cannot speak to their character. I have no idea who you are or what you stand for, and QUITE CLEARLY say so. Who you are and what you stand for are irrelevant for the demonstration - the issue is the gross lack of security of the vote tabulation systems. Again, as I say repeatedly in the article, this is just a demonstration to show the lack of security in our voting systems. In fact, if one WERE ignorant enough to take this demonstration seriously, one would note that "you" LOSE as a result of the machine being hacked, rather than WIN!  In the demonstration, "you" are the VICTIM of election tampering, not the beneficiary. Did you even read the article before you wrote me?

Read it again. I NEVER made a single allegation regarding you and voter fraud, and go out of my way to explain so. Again, I VERY CLEARLY state that I don't know you and can’t speak to your character, and that this is just a demonstration.

In closing, I would like to apologize to you again for the misunderstanding, and I understand that seeing the results of your race and your name could be upsetting. This is an upsetting issue.  But what is truly upsetting is the ease by which an election could be stolen because of the STUPID decision to roll out these sub-standard machines, which is the entire point of the exercise.

I would think that someone who relied on these machines to determine their career would be VERY interested in knowing whether or not you could trust the results, but you don’t seem to be concerned about that. I never imagined that anyone intelligent enough to hold public office could interpret such a simple example so incorrectly. Again, I repeatedly stated that it was a demonstration only, and everybody ELSE who has read it very clearly understands that.

If you have any more questions, please let me know.

Chuck Herrin, CISSP, CISA, MCSE, CEH
 

Defending "Faux" News?  What?

Comments:

I am quoting you from your rationale that Fox News viewers really
don't want to face the fact their president lied to them and now
there are hundreds of thousands of people whose blood is on YOUR
hands as well as mine. And the way you explain it away is: "As
far as Iraq goes...It's a lot easier in a make-believe world"

I've waited 24 hours since reading this and I'm definitely mad at
you. How on earth do you live with yourself? You are the pathetic
apathetic reason our country sucks right now. You suck. I'm not
sending my son to Iraq and will move to another country before the
blood of my children is on your hands too.

Vera

A: <sigh> Hi Vera,

I'm not defending the network, apathy, or escapism, and to say that I am misses the ENTIRE point. If I were apathetic or escapist, I sure as hell wouldn't spend so much time and effort trying to get people on both sides to see the problem, and I CERTAINLY wouldn't be going against my party to try and bring attention to the issue. I definitely wouldn't try to explain my point to a Democratic critic.

The whole POINT of the article was explain WHY republicans don't want to admit that the election was stolen. In case you haven't noticed, I FULLY admit that the election was stolen, and am doing everything I can to fix that. That's what brought you to my site in the first place! Because I spoke out against the problem, not because I am apathetic.

I'm sorry you feel the way you do, but I'm NOT defending apathy or escapism, I'm explaining the phenomena in an attempt to get people to understand the mechanism and WHY people think what they do. That's why I said,

"I supported the war in Iraq, because I trusted that our leaders
would do the right thing. Specifically, I trusted Colin Powell. I
bought it, and I was deceived by my trusted leaders, and it hurts"

SupportED. Past tense. And now I don't, and my leaders lied to me,
and it hurts.

"Look, these lies are comfortable, and make us feel better about
ourselves. That's why so many of us choose to deceive ourselves and
believe them."

These are not the words of someone who believes the lies. Nobody can believe the lies once they realize that it's a conscious CHOICE - but most people (many of us, not me) never think that deeply about it and realize that we're being lied to. These are the words of someone who can't stand to see his conservative family and friends spout
Republican propaganda as "news". I speak in the first person because I am a conservative and an American, and it wouldn't make sense to refer to "them", since we all have the same problems.

Some of us just don't realize it. And for those of us who don't,
they need to be informed. Which is what I'm doing!

Final quotes:
"I admit - I was a big fan when it first hit the airwaves." --past
tense, I admit I WAS a fan

"And as you watch them reinforce the same views, presenting press
releases taken straight from the Republican leadership as
"journalism"" --Again, not defending them, and I don't understand why
you think I am. That's a straight-up attack on them.

"Watch Fox News, if you can stand it, for a little while. They tell
us we're the good guys, and it must be true, because they're "fair
and balanced".--"fair and balanced". Right. <sarcasm, anyone?>

I have to admit, it's comfortable there. It's as comfortable as
pre-screened campaign audiences and a Cabinet full of Yes-Men, but
it's wrong."

BUT IT'S WRONG. You must have missed that part. I'm clearly not
defending the network. I can't stand to watch Fox anymore, and I
consistently refer to it as "news" throughout the article.

...I think maybe I was just too honest, and maybe the truth struck a bad chord
with you. Or maybe you skimmed the article and didn't read the whole
thing ("but it's wrong", etc). I understand that, but I'm not creating the reality of where we are, I'm just reporting it. And trying to make it better. And that doesn't make me part of the problem.

I'm sorry that you just don't get it.

Happy Holidays!

Chuck Herrin, CISSP, CISA, MCSE, CEH