I don't have any interest in Florida Politics, but I do think that this needs to be aired Nation wide. The following is from Clint Curtis who is running against another Republican Crook.

Office:US Congress FL-24 Website:
www.clintcurtis.com
Background
I am a former Republican who became a whistleblower that came forward and testified to Congress under oath, regarding the request from a sitting congressman to build a computer program that could, without detection, flip your vote in an election. This manipulation would allow a person or political party to take control of voting machineand decide who wins the election, regardless of the true vote count. In March of 2005, I passed a polygraph test as to the accuracy of my statements.

I believe our district is currently represented by one of the most corrupt politicians in history. I have attended closed-door meetings where Congressman Tom Feeney spoke candidly about altering election results.

Feeney is deeply involved with individuals like super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff and has been an active participant in this unprecedented decade of corruption. Listening to Feeney has given me the impression that he never had a vote he wouldn't sell or a law he wouldn't side-step. District 24 deserves an alternative to reelecting a corrupt congressman.

I am running because our democracy insists that Americans know that their vote will actually count and that elections must not be pre-determined by manipulating electronic voting machines. Feeney believes that elections are nothing but sporting events. He believes it is acceptable to fix elections through voting machines, suppressing the vote through all types of creative methods, or in simply letting those in power declare a winner regardless of the vote outcome. He attempted to do this in the 2000 Election. Feeney's actions show he is a big believer in a controlled concept of democracy --where elections are pre-determined.

Feeney's actions would seem to support: "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. " I humbly --and wholeheartedly disagree". Your vote must be counted!

I have put my name and reputation on the line for several years. I have spoken to the press, law-enforcement officials and even members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee --under oath and on video tape. Now I am putting my name on the line as a candidate against Mr. Feeney. His deliberate corruption forces me to provide this district with an alternative. I will need your help to achieve honesty in our district.

Goals:
Make elections transparent and fair
Provide energy independence now
Provide for Universal no-fault healthcare
Get out of Iraq and protect our borders
Keep jobs in America
End corruption in Congress

Issues:
Make elections transparent and fair
Provide energy independence now
Provide for Universal no-fault healthcare

Clint Curtis is a computer geek who knows how easy it is to manipulate your vote because he was asked by Congressman Tom Feeney to create such a prototype in October 2000. He is a real hero, the real deal, and not too many of them come along nowadays.

It is all about YOUR VOTE actually getting counted.

Ron
www.WeDemocrats.com
www.uslinx.com

In previous post I talked about so called "Dirty Money" here is Shimkus Record:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________ :
CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND :
ETHICS IN WASHINGTON :
11 Dupont Cir., N.W. :
Washington, D.C. 20036 :

http://www.citizensforethics.org/filelibrary/20040929_complaint.pdf

Abramoff vote
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=3814&can_id=BC031155

Shimkus and Lobbying
http://www.soapblox.net/chicago/tag.do?tag=lobbyist+scandal

Shimkus on the environment, a zero percent voting record according to
the Sierra Club.
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200609/losers2.asp

Dan you're half way down this page which also lists Shimkus contribution
from Abramoff and Delay.
http://www.ourcongress.org/section/__all__/2

Shimkus PAC
http://www.sj-r.com/sections/news/stories/80614.asp

"We can point to political activity around many other environmental concerns to show the connection between campaign contributions from industry and weak environmental policy. Who lobbies against tougher emissions standards? Who lobbies against clean water laws? Who lobbies against logging, mining and drilling restrictions? Every time you look at the opponents of environmental protection, you see major donors to political campaigns."

Drew Warshaw, Cornell University

While in Illinois we don't have as big an issue on enviromental concerns as say Alaska, we do have problems with Corporate donations influencing decisions made for us and all Americans.

Here in IL-19th Congressional District, we had two great Congressmen in a row Glenn Poshard and David Phelps, then Bush and his cohorts including then Gov. George Ryan re-districted Illinois in the most ridiculous way so that Shimkus could win in this district, it was shady to say the least.

Check out the donations received by Shimkus and his voting record.

Vote for Danny Stover in Nov. and return to an era of honest hard working Representatives who keep their word.

Ron
www.WeDemocrats.com
www.uslinx.com

Anyone want to comment on an article feel free, or if you have an article, or anything you want to publish, send it to me and in subject line of the email put "For Know It All". send it to netquest@shawneelink.net......

Below is a reprint of Joan Mandle's, Joan is:
Joan D. Mandle, Ph.D.
Executive Director, Democracy Matters
Associate Professor of Sociology, Colgate University
PO Box 157
Hamilton New York 13346
315 824 4306
joanm@democracymatters.org
www.democracymatters.org

"CHANGE ELECTIONS. CHANGE AMERICA."

Why We Need Reform

by Joan Mandle

I. The lifeblood of our democracy is under threat.

Democracy is above all a process of citizen participation—but it is precisely that participation that has weakened by the private financing of campaigns.

• Voter turnout for elections has declined.
• Cynicism about politics and government has steadily grown, especially among young people.
• The cost of running for office continues to escalate. Fewer citizens can afford to run for office.
• Uncontested and non-competitive elections have increased in frequency.
• The number of bright young people who want to spend their lives in politics or government service has fallen.
• A 2004 Harris poll reported that 80% of Americans think that “big companies and political action committees exercise too much power and influence on politicians.”
• Less than 1% of Americans contributes the vast majority of private money going to fund campaigns.

II. What can we do?

In response there has emerged a pro-democracy movement, committed to deepening the democratic process in the United States. Fundamental to this movement is the struggle to change the way election campaigns are financed, especially by ensuring public financing for serious candidates. Fundamentally a democracy can only be as strong as its elections—elections in which many ideas are heard and where citizens actively engage by running for office, participating in debate, and voting.

Private money in elections undermines a truly democratic political process. Changing the way elections are financed is the first and most important step in resolving this shameful situation. If private money continues to dominate American politics, the desires of the affluent will control legislation and the rest of us will be ignored. If we change campaign finance laws, we will help create the real democracy most of us want—one in which laws and policy reflect the will of the majority of the American people. Democracy Matters’ motto is CHANGE ELECTIONS. CHANGE AMERICA.

III. What is wrong with the present system?

Politicians, who depend on huge sums of money to run their campaigns, respond more to the concerns of wealthy donors and special interests than they do to the concerns of voters.

Those without access to wealth are locked out of the system, unable to afford to run for office.

Candidates and elected officials spend too much time fundraising, and not enough time listening to citizens’ voices on everything from the environment to college tuition to civil rights.

Because of national scandals and the corrupting influence of money in politics, many Americans - especially young people -- have lost faith in the system.

Privately financed election campaigns waste taxpayers’ money by giving tax cuts and other paybacks to wealthy special interests.

Incumbents typically outspend challengers and as a result win an overwhelming number of elections.

Campaign spending is escalating out of control.

Only when politicians are responsive to people— not to money— can Americans get the laws and social policies they care about.

IV. Is there a solution?

It is obvious that to sustain a democracy we need to reform the way private money dominates our elections. Citizens throughout the country have been organizing together since the early 1990’s to correct these problems by instituting systems of full public financing of elections, often called Voter-Owned Clean Elections (CE) or Fair Elections. CE laws passed in states and cities have been passed in Connecticut (2005); Maine (1996); Arizona (1998); Albuquerque, NM (2005); Portland, OR (2005). In addition, New Mexico passed CE for the races for its Public Regulation Commission; New Jersey for two state Assembly districts; and North Carolina for Appellate and Supreme Court judges. CE has proven to be both constitutional (the courts have ruled it does not harm free speech) and costs only a reasonable amount.

V. Voter-owned clean elections in practice means:

• Ordinary citizens can run for office without depending on wealthy special interests. An equal and limited amount of funding is offered to qualified “clean candidates.”
• Candidates can spend their time talking with constituents rather than “dialing for dollars.”
• Faith in the electoral system can be restored as voters see that candidates are accountable to them rather than to wealthy special interests.
• Elections can be less expensive because public financing is limited.
• The influence of lobbyists and special interests on legislation is reduced.
• It creates opportunities for underfunded candidates. Minorities and women can and do run and win more frequently.
• More competitive elections; more diverse candidates; more challengers; more choice for voters; more participation in politics.
• The quality of legislation improves and more closely reflects the wishes of the electorate as a whole.

VI. Voter-owned clean elections works. A few examples from Clean Elections states:

Maine:
• In 2006, 78% of the Maine legislature had run as “clean candidates,” owing their allegiance to no one but their constituents.
• The number of competitive races doubled between 1998 and 2004, and the number of incumbents re-elected declined.
• In 2004, 8 of 11 third party candidates (Green Party) qualified for the same level of public financing as other candidates.

Arizona:
• In 2004, Arizona elected “clean” candidates as Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and other state-wide offices.
• Voter turnout increased from 64% in 1996 to 77% in 2004.
• Public financing of all state elections has not cost taxpayers any money. The system is completely funded by a levy on criminal and civil penalties, and voluntary contributions.
• The number of Native American and Latino candidates tripled between 2000 and 2002.

VII. More Information

Center for Governmental Studies www.cgs.org

Steven Levin, 2006 “Keeping It Clean.”

Northeast Action publications www.neaction.org/pubs.htm#ce

Public Campaign www.publicampaign.org www.publicampaign.org/clean-facts (also see their column: “Ouch! How Money in Politics Hurts You.”)

Democracy Matters (archives) “Money on My Mind” www.democracymatters.org/ResearchCenter/Money/index.php

I was talking to a guy on MSN IM the other night, and he sent me this:

USLINX.com iz d hottest nu portal on d net, thR srch iz unbelievable, & best of aL unlike g%gle, yahoo & othRz dey dun store info bout U, jst do yor srch & n refRnce 2 yor srch iz mAd.

I asked him what he was saying although I did recognize some words, here was what he said in plain English:

USLINX.com is the hottest new portal on the net, their search is unbelievable, and best of all unlike Google, yahoo and others they don't store information about you, just do your search and no reference to your search is made.

Now that I see it in English I could follow what he said, I have used shortcuts before, but this is in need of a complete dictionary, to decipher what is being said.

Ron
www.WeDemocrats.com
www.USLINX.com