The issue of what happened in 2004 is not an academic one. For the second election in a row, the president of the United States was selected not by the uncontested will of the people but under a cloud of dirty tricks. Given the scope of the GOP machinations, we simply cannot be certain that the right man now occupies the Oval Office -- which means, in effect, that we have been deprived of our faith in democracy itself.

American history is littered with vote fraud -- but rather than learning from our shameful past and cleaning up the system, we have allowed the problem to grow even worse. If the last two elections have taught us anything, it is this: The single greatest threat to our democracy is the insecurity of our voting system. If people lose faith that their votes are accurately and faithfully recorded, they will abandon the ballot box. Nothing less is at stake here than the entire idea of a government by the people.

Voting, as Thomas Paine said, ''is the right upon which all other rights depend.'' Unless we ensure that right, everything else we hold dear is in jeopardy.

This article is truly disturbing. I clearly remember the allegations of voter manipulation and fraud in Ohio, but I had no idea of the scale or how strong the case was. The fact that Rolling Stone has been the only outlet to publish an examination of this issue in this much detail is even more disturbing. We require the media, as the 4th estate, to provide a check against government impropriety. The freedoms the press, and the rest of the public, enjoys does not come without responsibility. If there is in fact voter fraud persisting on the scale this article alleges, the major media outlets have not honored the responsibility they have to the American public.

On one level, I concur with Decius's opinion that this type of analysis would best be presented in a non-partisan academic journal, rather than a music magazine. That being said, I wonder why this has not occurred already. In no uncertain terms, this article is a challenge to the rest of the mediasphere to further investigate the issue. Much to Kennedy's credit, he provided a reference for every factoid he used, totaling a whooping two-hundred-and-eight footnotes. There is no challenge here figuring out where he got his information from, in order to challenge or validate the allegations present.

This challenge should be answered. Our constitutional values demand it. At this point, the goal should not be to overturn the presidency, but to insure that all votes are counted in future elections. This is critical in order for our democracy to work.

Rolling Stone : Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

Will 2008 bring the first Internet president? Last time, Howard Dean and later John Kerry showed that the whole idea of "early money" is now obsolete in presidential politics. The Internet lets candidates who catch fire raise millions in small donations practically overnight.

No one knows exactly where technology is taking politics, but we're beginning to see some clues. For starters, the longtime stranglehold of media consultants may be over. In 2004, Errol Morris, the director of "The Thin Blue Line" and "The Fog of War," on his own initiative made several brilliant anti-Bush ads (they featured lifelong Republicans explaining why they were voting for Kerry). Not only did Kerry not air the ads, he told me recently he never even knew they existed. In 2008, any presidential candidate with half a brain will let a thousand ad ideas bloom (or stream) online and televise only those that are popular downloads. Deferring to "the wisdom of crowds" will be cheaper and more effective.

A New Open-Source Politics | MSNBC

A man wielding a box cutter has attacked the leader of South Korea's main opposition party, slashing her face during a campaign rally.

Park, chairwoman of the Grand National Party, suffered a 10 centimeter (four-inch) cut to her face, will be hospitalized for at least a week and will not be able to speak well for months, said Choi Kyung-deuk, spokesman for Severance Hospital.

He told police that he was "upset at a society that lacks democracy," said Han Jin-ho, head of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency.

"In a democratic society, any acts of terrorism or violence during election campaigns cannot be tolerated under any circumstance for whatever reason," Roh said during a Cabinet meeting, according to his office.

Welcome to the world of Korean politics. This Ji guy has a pretty long rap sheet. There is also coverage in The Korean Times.

CNN.com - South Korea party leader's face slashed

The State Secret Privilege was used dishonestly in its first case!

United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1 (1953) is a landmark legal case in 1953 that saw the creation of the State Secrets Privilege, an unofficial but judicially-recognized extension of presidential power.

The widows of 3 crew members of a B-29 Superfortress bomber that had crashed in 1948 sought accident reports on the crash, but were told that to release such details would threaten national security by revealing the bomber's top-secret mission.

In 2000, the accident reports were declassified and released, and were found to contain no secret information. They did, however, contain information about the poor state of condition of the aircraft itself, which would have been very compromising to the Air Force's case. Many commentators have alleged government misuse of secrecy in the landmark case.

United States v. Reynolds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic political consultant who worked on Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign, said the alliance makes sense for both Mrs Clinton and Mr Murdoch. "She's not going any place. The only place she goes after this is the White House. Why not have a friend? That's a smart move for Mr Murdoch to make." He acknowledged that "there are some on the left who will feel that this is not a good thing".

I never would have predicted a Clinton/Murdoch alliance..

FT - Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch

This just in from Decius:

I just received fairly reliable word that the Georgia Private Investigator Felony Statute has been vetoed by the Governor. Unfortunately I don't have a press link on that, so if anyone out there has a secondary source they can confirm this through, that would be helpful, but it seems like the Governor has heard the message from the technology community and understood the ramifications of this law. Thank you to everyone who communicated with them!

The bill summary does not show that it has been vetoed yet. There does not appear to be any press engaging the story yet either... There is a recent AP story referring to 20 bills the Governor vetoed, but nothing about this bill yet.

Confirmed:

The existing definition of “private detective business,” continued in this bill, in conjunction with the applicable exemptions in the law, fails to exclude from the private investigator licensing requirement many professions that collect information or may be called as expert witnesses in court proceedings. To expand the penalty from a misdemeanor to a felony without revision of the existing definitions in the law could result in unintended consequences; I therefore VETO HB1259.

HB 1259 Vetoed!

MEDIA ALERT -- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday there will be a meeting at Kennesaw College:

Date: May 8, 2006
Time: 10:00am
Location: Room 300

Speakers: Calvin Hill, Representative who sponsored the bill, and
John Villanes, Chairman, Georgia Board of Private Detectives

It would be nice to see anyone that cares at all about this topic. REALLY if you care - make arrangements to be there. It does matter and I think we can all make a difference even if it means banding together. The Governor has to make a choice by Tuesday to Sign or Veto.

Scott Moulton

Decius: Unforuntately I will be unable to attend due to some responsibilities at work, but I strongly encourage those who care about this issue to make a showing at this meeting if at all possible. If they don't, this will turn into a very one sided discussion about a nationally unprecidented and extremely destructive law.

Rattle: I am going to be somewhere in the northeast/atlantic region while this is taking place, and unable to attend in person. I would highly appreciate it if someone present with a cell phone that has speaker phone capability could relay me the talk. I can mute the phone on my end and be able to hear the content. Now would be a very good time for everyone in contact with the media to send them a reminder about the debate. People need to make sure this is in their Monday morning calandar.

More information:

* Atlanta High Crimes Investigation Association web page
* SecurityFocus Article
* ForensicFocus Thread
* MemeStreams Thread #1
* MemeStreams Thread #2
* Bill Text

Update: There is an unconfirmed report that the Governor has vetoed the bill.

Debate on HB1259 in Kennesaw

It has taken almost three years—by some counts, more than 6 years—but ICANN’s domain name policy making organization has finally taken a stand on Whois and privacy. And the results were a decisive defeat for the copyright and trademark interests and the US government, and a stunning victory for advocates of the rights of individual domain name registrants.

In Historic Vote on WHOIS Purpose, Reformers Win by 2/3 Majority

President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ''to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ''execute" a law he believes is unconstitutional.

''Years down the road, people will not understand why the policy doesn't look like the legislation," he said.

''This is an attempt by the president to have the final word on his own constitutional powers, which eliminates the checks and balances that keep the country a democracy," Fein said. ''There is no way for an independent judiciary to check his assertions of power, and Congress isn't doing it, either. So this is moving us toward an unlimited executive power."

Rather than using vetos, Bush is using signing statements. The result is policy which does not match legislation passed by Congress. This is how systems based on the rule of law break down.

While pondering this Orwellian nightmare, I remind you that today was Loyalty Day, as declared by the Bush Administration.

Bush challenges hundreds of laws - The Boston Globe

Yochai Benkler’s book, The Weath of Networks, is out. This is — by far — the most important and powerful book written in the fields that matter most to me in the last ten years. If there is one book you read this year, it should be this. The book has a wiki; it can be downloaded as a pdf for free under a Creative Commons license; or it can be bought at places like Amazon.

Read it. Understand it. You are not serious about these issues — on either side of these debates — unless you have read this book.

Downloaded and queued in my reading list..

Lessig Blog: Benkler’s book is out