Salon.com | Joe Conason's Journal: "Bolstering such concerns are the findings of top computer-security experts such as Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins and David Dill of Stanford. Rubin, who was given a copy of the Diebold voting computers' source code several months ago, has declared its protections against fraud to be worthless. Dill told Newsweek that the risk of a stolen election is 'extremely high.'

The sickening irony of this situation is that it developed from congressional efforts to preclude another fiasco like Florida 2000. Now Rep. Rush Holt, D.-N.J., has proposed legislation that would require a separate printed record of every computerized vote so that recounts can be audited with a paper trail. But Rep. Bob Ney, the committee chairman, opposes Holt's Voter Confidence Act. Ney happens to be a Republican from Ohio. But why aren't Republicans -- many of whom fret incessantly about 'ballot security' in black and Latino neighborhoods -- more disturbed by the threat of computer cheating? "


I keep trying to find some time to blog about something other than politics--but the Bushies won't give me a break. Here again is a story that would have had a completely different response had Clinton been in office. Quite possibly, the Democrats might be dragging their feet, but surely the Republicans would be clamoring for an investigation.

I once conceded (at least sub-consciously) that while I disagreed with Republicans, I thought they were morally upstanding. In other words, I wasn't one, but I assumed that conservatives were genuine about their morality and liberals like myself were far more prone to relative morality. So, I thought, liberals just had to be more careful about their justifications. Now I see clearly that, while I won't declare liberals more moral (at all), that conservatives have NO moral high ground with me anymore. Certainly not on the justification of them being conservative.