Please Try Out Official Trial Site For New E-Voting Machines

by John Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:39

Did anyone spot the oxymoron in the above paragraphs? ' intelligent articulate sensitive well-read thinking people who would otherwise vote for some bleedin' socialist' - if he/she possessed any of these qualities, there is NO chance he/she would vote socialist - only morons who have never read about goings-on in soviet russia, north korea, cuba etc etc would think of voting socialist. I'll give a bottle of California wine to anyone who can name me a socialist country (past or present) whose people have been/are better off than those in Ireland. E-voting is really cool, so much better than messing around with bits of paper. Another step in the FF/PD modernisation of this country. Well done, Martin Cullen!

by Canteen Kevin Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:05

Welcome John, our newest throwback and cheerleader for all things dickhead.

PS -Jugoslavia in 1960's had a higher per capita income than Ireland, better social/health care and more liberal society but you can keep your bottle of plonk and do YNW with it.

by Another John Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:39

Canteen Kevin,

The success of Yugoslavia in the 1960s had more to do with huge US subsidies, massive borrowings, the reparatition of wages from workers in Europe, as well as tourism in Northern Croatia and Slovenia.

It had very little to do with socialism of any kind and more to do with reckless government policies, which eventually caught up with Yugoslavia in the late 70s, and throughout the 80s

by Oxymoron Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:40

Ireland was only beginning its capitalist development in the 1960s and was the least-capitalist and poorest of the capitalist countries at that time. Yugoslavia was the least-socialist and richest of the socialist countries at that time. So, the richest socialist country of the time was marginally better off than the poorest capitalist country. Big deal! Once Ireland embraced true capitalism under Lemass, it quickly surpassed Yugoslavia in every sphere: economically, politically, socially. Proves my point. Compare them today. Ireland has embraced capitalism and is one of the richest countries in the world, and is experiencing mass immigration. Serbia is a stagnant socialist backwater, virtually the entire population of which is trying to get out.

by Canteen Kevin Mon Mar 29, 2004 13:32

- It was first

"I'll give a bottle of California wine to anyone who can name me a socialist country (past or present) whose people have been/are better off than those in Ireland. ",

- it is now ;

"So, the richest socialist country of the time was marginally better off than the poorest capitalist country. Big deal! "

Proves your point? It only proves that your glib assumptions hold as much credence as a Ryanair free travel for life guarantee. I could have also added East Germany and Romania (believe it or not) on the 1960s/70's as other examples of socialist countries offering better standards of living than many capitalist countries.

Oh yeah and "Ireland .....was the least-capitalist and poorest of the capitalist countries at that time."

I suppose 4/5 of Africa, Central & South America, 1/2 Aisa were communist at the time or is your definition of capitalism exclusive to US/Europe etc?

by Another John Mon Mar 29, 2004 13:41

Yugoslavia's success had nothing to do with socialism. It was a country rich on subsidies, captiatlist tourism, loans and reparatitions.

As with regard to the issue of social welfare, in the 1960s no unemployment benefit existed in Yugoslavia

by pat c Mon Mar 29, 2004 14:15

(Interesting article. Full story at link. pat c)

How E-Voting Threatens Democracy

In January 2003, voting activist Bev Harris was holed up in the basement of her three-story house in Renton, Washington, searching the Internet for an electronic voting machine manual, when she made a startling discovery.

Clicking on a link for a file transfer protocol site belonging to voting machine maker Diebold Election Systems, Harris found about 40,000 unprotected computer files. They included source code for Diebold's AccuVote touch-screen voting machine, program files for its Global Election Management System tabulation software, a Texas voter-registration list with voters' names and addresses, and what appeared to be live vote data from 57 precincts in a 2002 California primary election.

by John Mon Mar 29, 2004 14:21

Canteen Kevin, why are you always taking examples from the 1960s for socialist 'success'? This is 2004. Can't you find any more recent examples? You mention East Germany and Romania. Socialism there was such a success they had to build a wall around the former to keep the people in, while in the latter there was a mass uprising to overthrow and execute the numbero uno socialist. Agreed, the differences between capitalist prosperity and socialist stagnation were not so stark in the 1960s. Why? Because at that time the socialists had only been in power for a decade or two in any of the countries mentioned. It takes time for a crap ideology like socialism to destroy an economy. But, they did, eventually! By the 1980s capitalist countries, Ireland included, had completely outstripped socialist countries in per capita living standards. Thats why socialism collapsed in all the countries you mentioned, or hadn't you heard? As for Africa, yes its mostly run by socialist dictators like Mugabe.

by Freddy Mon Mar 29, 2004 14:46

So, a medium to good hacker could swing an election or referendum? The process is supposed to be open and accountable. If it is not, then there is no way the public can have confidence in it. That is extremely bad for democracy.
As for the other argument about socialist countries versus capitalist countries, I'm not saying that Cuba is perfect but has anyone compared the Cuban health system to the Irish one? or indeed to the health system in the USA?

by Dimitri Catic Mon Mar 29, 2004 18:44

Yugoslavia was never socialist, it was undemocratically run by a bureacracy that rested on a planned and state owned economy. This planned and state owned economy brought many many benefits to the people of the ex Yugoslavia including a better quality of living, seen in free helth, education, decent public services etc. In saying this because the economy was not run democratically and because the more developed countries in the West were still run on a capitalist basis Yugoslavia did not reach its full potential. This eventually lead to the downfall of the planned economy and the restoration of capotalism in Yugoslavia. The huge decrease in living standards that this meant lead to the stoking up of ethnic and religious tensions which saw the break up of the state and inter ethnic bloodbath which we are still seeing to this day

by Idiot Tue Mar 30, 2004 12:43

Angola, Chad, Liberia, Morocco, Brazil, Haiti, and Thailand are my 'dream team’ of capitalism in action. Each one is a shining example of the good that people can expect for capitalism as it marches forth guaranteeing liberty, justice, and prosperity for all.

by Canteen Kevin Tue Mar 30, 2004 13:46

You argue that post-war socialist prosperity was temporary and only due to the communists "inheriting" effective infrastructure and proceeding to ruin it. You are displaying incredible ignorance. Jugoslavia, East Germany and much of eastern Europe was devastated by WW2 or hadn't you heard?

"As for Africa, yes its mostly run by socialist dictators like Mugabe." This is a blatant lie, African countries have their share of dictaors, to ascribe their mess to socialism is twisting reality. The recent move to exploit African oil resources as an alternative to Mid-East is socialist? African countries like Nigeria, Guinea, CAR, Congo etc. are supported and protected by the West and allowed perpetrate repression and massive social inequality. Where are your brave free market warriors here? Or I suppose it's still the commies fault.

by John Wed Mar 31, 2004 10:52

East Germany was no more devastated than West Germany. Yet, by 1960 West Germany was one of the richest states in the world. Romania was no more devasted than Austria or Holland. The richest state in Africa is capitalist South Africa. There are some poor capitalist sates in the world, but lots of rich ones, and the list of rich ones is growing. For example: Ireland, S. Korea, Singapore, Taiwan - all these joined the list of rich capitalist sates in the past 20 years. Other countries from East Europe will join it within next 20 years. There are NO (repeat: NO) rich socialist states. Name me one socialist state where people are better off than in Ireland.

by another john Wed Mar 31, 2004 18:52

the people in north korea are much better off. they know nothing of the outside world, in ehich they are told that everyone is starving and the country is run by al capone types. most of them have never seen any foreigners represetned on screen but for Chinese and maybe albanians, if the stock is old. so no racism. they don't know that they're hungry because they never ever got enough food, and they don't know that they govvernemnt is corrupt and illegitimate because they cannot compare it without any where else. theyhave been promised slavation by the govt who are also divine figures, so no need for opposition of complaints.

by jilted john Wed Mar 31, 2004 18:54

particularly the slavation bit.
Excellent and spot on typo.

by Troll spotter Wed Mar 31, 2004 23:14

Thats pathetic, John. Planting a deliberate error and then jumping in under a slightly different name two minutes later to use it as a joke. You must be really bored.

by Another John Thu Apr 01, 2004 21:29

Another John is different to jilted john and john, hence the different names. If i was crass enough to praise myself, i'd at least use a different name, you idiot.

by Damien C Sat Apr 24, 2004 05:07

Hmmm, it's not surprising you were jilted, John.

But that's beside the point. The real reason I'm posting here is because I have just found the following news item about electronic voting. Seems that we are not the only people having doubts. See the link: