article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133214,00.html

Yikes.

 

Never mind the chimps. The article says that a Microsoft OS is running the system. That's the ball game for me. What are they gonna do when the OS crashes...postpone the election while it reboots?

 

all lies. Thats foxs news :chuckles:

 

 

Okay. Here it is in the New York Times in a slightly longer article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/26/we...ew/26zell.html

 

Quite honestly it is insulting to my intelligence that this moronic puppet thinks I should implicitly trust election officials. I like really want to wipe his brains onto his shirt off the bottom of my boot.

 

Of course, this is probably the same Diebold official who said in public that he would do everything in his power to insure Bush's re-election. Is he or his company the least bit trustworthy now? Can we trust ANY result that comes out of a Diebold voting computer?

Proof of the old adage: 'Tis better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.