Ha ha! I love the title of this post from Lifehacker today.

Though to be honest, I'm holding my full gloat for when Bush is walking out of the Whitehouse for the last time.

I've been barred from voting in Maryland before and I expected this to be no different. I was not disappointed.

Today I went to my polling place bright and early and explained to them that I'm a computer professional and refuse to use machines that have a proven record of insecurity. Such poorly designed machines are no better than playing video poker where your odds of winning aren't random, but decided by rules someone wrote into a computer.

They originally decided that I could use the provisional ballot, but once the two judges talked, they took it from me and said that if I wouldn't use the machines, I couldn't vote.

Now some would say, "don't be such a chump and just use the machines! You're like my grandfather who won't use computers because he's afraid of the technology!" But there's a huge difference between protesting the use of a technology out of suspicion and ignorant fear and doing so due to analysis of careful scholarly research. A simple Google search of "accuvote ts" brings up link after link of studies done on the Diebold machines showing flaw and security issues. These aren't hypotheicals, they've been done and demonstrated.

Then someone will likely say, "you knew this was going to be a problem, so why didn't you go to your elections office or request an absentee ballot or such?"

That's all well and good assuming you know about that. Granted, I knew this would likely be an issue because of last time, but what about the first time I tried or anyone else who runs into this issue during this election? Besides, it's not our job or responsibility to become familiar with all the voting rules, regulations, procedures, addendums etc. I wanted to see if the voting system worked the way it is currently set up so I read the information they sent in the mail and I went to my polling place and followed every direction.

Some have told me that I'm throwing away my vote, but am I really? I like to think that what I'm actually doing is sacrificing my vote to raise awareness of several important issues:

Maryland should not have purchased these machines, should have discontinued their use upon discovery of their vast array of vulnerabilities, should sue Diebold for our money back + punitive damages, and at the very least should give us the option of not using them. None of these came to be and the result is such that I'm forced to use the machines or not vote at all and that's not OK.

Maybe there's no meaning to a political candidate who will stand in the rain to speak to people. Maybe it's just a gimmick. Maybe after he's elected, he won't do things like that anymore. But you gotta admit, that's pretty classy.

Oh, and this:

"$150,000 for clothes and they apparently didn't buy her a raincoat."

Made me laugh

(H/T to Digg.com for the link)

While making it very clear that he wants to stay out of the politics, Schneier pointed out that Obama seems to get the point that security needs to balanced with the over-all goals of our country. In other words, Obama understands that security doesn't trump everything so one more point for Obama.

I finally got around to watching most of the first debate this weekend and I was very disappointed to learn that there are good qualities in McCain. I know that sounds stupid, but the reason is that I want Obama to win (even though I would have preferred Ron Paul), and any positive point for McCain is by default a negative for Obama.

In this case, McCain talked about one thing that is very important to me: vetoing pork legislation.

I have always said that if I were President, I would hold Congress hostage by vetoing ANY bill that had unrelated items attached to it (such as pork spending). McCain said he would do the same. Not only that, but Obama is a horrible porker. The idiot refers to it as the "Earmarks system" and defends it as "necessary". Their records reflect these statements as well (according to Citizens Against Government Waste - CAGW). Obama is one of the worst pork spenders and McCain one of the most consistent opponents of the same. Ouch.

I still can't support McCain for his stance on regulation, for his constant negative and deceptive ad practices, and his ludicrous choice of running mate, but this definitely raised my opinion of him substantially. If he'd only picked Ron Paul as a running mate, this election would go very differently for him.

Is it too late for him to switch?

And just for gigles: Sarah Palin's Debate Flow Chart.

Well, not really, but they could be. You see, John McCain believes in light market regulation. Because, gosh darned it, that's worked so well in the past…

And for your amusement, click for today's political cartoon on the issue.

And another about the bailout.

Sarah Palin's Yahoo account has been broken into and e-mails found there posted to Wikileaks. I would say this was a pretty rotten thing to do, but the perpetrators claim they did it to prove that Palin has been using her private e-mail to circumvent recordkeeping laws about government business. If that's true, then perhaps this needed to happen.

(H/T to Privacy.org for the link)