March 27th, 2007

Domineering Diebold

photo credit: cayobo

We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. (George Orwell, 1984, p. 263)

Faithful readers of my blog will no doubt recall my indefatigable hatred of and opposition to the Diebold election machines.

The opposition continues, fomented by such reports as this one from the Boston Globe:

Diebold Election Systems Inc., one of the country’s largest manufacturers of voting machines, is scheduled to argue in court today that the Office of the Secretary of State wrongly picked another company to supply thousands of voting machines for the disabled.

Diebold says it will ask a judge to overturn the selection of AutoMARK, a Diebold business competitor, because the office of Secretary of State William F. Galvin failed to choose the best machine.

“We compete against AutoMARK around the country all the time,” Weisberg said. “Based on the criteria set out by the Commonwealth, we had a fair degree of confidence we’d come out on top, and nothing we heard during the process dissuaded us of that confidence.”

Weisberg said Diehold was so stunned it did not get the contract that it now believes “it’s worth the time and money” of going to court to challenge the contract’s award, even though the company at this stage has no hard evidence of unfair treatment.

In court filings, Diebold has indicated it will ask a judge today to immediately halt further use or distribution of the AutoMARK machines to municipalities throughout the state. If a judge issues that order, Diehold will then present arguments over the coming weeks on why the process was flawed, Weisberg said.

“We want a judge to either order the contract awarded to Diebold, based on his review of the proposals, but if he does not want to go that far, to at least order a reopening of the competition,” he said.

Such arrogant pomposity portrays this corrupt company (and rightly so) as a jealous pre-teen throwing a temper tantrum because he didn’t get picked by the tetherball captain. Demanding government intervention simply because they can’t admit defeat and respect the decision of those in authority shows to what ends this body of thugs is willing to go in controlling our votes.

Read quotes about “voting” on Quoty

2 Responses to “Domineering Diebold”

  1. latterdayteancum
    March 27, 2007 at 11:26 am #


    That is stunning. I guess we no longer have the freedom to choose the products we use.

    I sincerely hope that this case is immediately dismissed by the court.

    I am not into conspiracy theories and don’t know how accurate your posts have been in its allegations against the company and its voting machines. But this case is definately ridiculous.

  2. Kelly Winterton
    March 27, 2007 at 2:34 pm #

    But I am into conspiracy theories, and I believe that our election system is controlled by money, media, insider knowledge, etc. I think there are three key ways which the shadow government manuevers their pre-chosen candidate into position 1) primaries, 2) black-box voting (or otherwise vote manipulation) and 3) the electoral college. These tools are effective because they are supported by money and media. My vote in Utah means absolutely nothing, because for the past I don’t know how many years and for the next I don’t know how many years all our electoral votes will be for a Republican candidate whether the Republican is the best man or not.

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.