A disturbing story has been widely circulated that a vote for Bush was the default choice in the software of electronic voting machines in a number of states.  By definition, “default” settings are built-in by the manufacturer to make sure their programs work properly, and can be changed by the user.  Some examples of default settings on a home computer are screen savers, type face, and screen resolution.

According an article by Ann Harrison, posted at http://www.counterpunch.org/harrison12082004.html

in certain counties in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas, and New Mexico where touch screen voting machines were used, there have been complaints from voters who selected Kerry on the touch screen and saw their votes change to Bush on a summary screen.  In addition, there was a specific problem with the Sequoia AVC Edge machine (not used in Ohio) where voters actually saw preselected default choices presented to them.

For those watching the growing body of evidence concerning election fraud in our past presidential election, one question has remained: Why don't we hear about this on the evening news?

As of yet it's been hard to explain why the controversies in Ukraine make the headlines, but when similar problems are discovered at home, you have to scour the Internet to find the information.

It certainly isn't for lack of events on which to report. Members of The House Judiciary Committee have been meeting regularly reviewing evidence of systematic voter suppression and voting machine tampering. A coalition of lawyers have filed a lawsuit against the Bush campaign citing deliberate manipulation of votes. Sworn testimony and signed affidavits have implicated companies, individuals, and a Florida congressman.

This developing story could eventually turn out to be more explosive than Watergate. But it's rarely mentioned on the major networks, and when it is, there's almost always a chiding remark about the "conspiracy nuts" and obscure "internet bloggers" who are behind it all.

COLUMBUS -- As Republican officials stonewall and subvert the recount process, Rev. Jesse Jackson has pronounced Ohio's vote fraud fiasco "the biggest deal since Selma" and has called for a national rally at "the scene of the crime" in Columbus January 3.

Another major national demonstration will follow in Washington on January 6, as Congress evaluates the Electoral College. Should at least one US Representative and one Senator challenge the electors' votes, a Constitutional crisis could ensue.

Meanwhile, volunteer attorneys have poured into Columbus from around the US to help investigate the bitterly contested presidential vote that has allegedly given George W. Bush Ohio's electoral votes and thus a second term. A lawsuit filed at the Ohio Supreme Court charges that a fair vote count would give the state and the presidency to John Kerry rather than Bush.

On December 21, notice of depositions were sent to President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell to appear and give testimony regarding the legal challenge of Ohio's elections results in the case Moss v Bush et al.

"Which is more revolting?" an editor e-mailed me the other day, "Rupert Murdoch spending $44 million for a triplex at 834 Fifth Avenue with 20 rooms and a monthly maintenance of $21,469.07, as narrated on the front page of that day's newspapers, or King Mswati III of Swaziland spending $690,000 on a Daimler-Chrysler Maybach 62?"

            Mention of the Great Beast buying his three-floor pad on Fifth Ave. gave me a chance to saunter down Memory Lane. I think Murdoch had one floor of that building back in the late 1970s, when his only properties in the United States were the Star and a newspaper in San Antonio, Texas. Then he bought the New York Post and duly made it onto either the cover of Time or Newsweek, I can't remember which. Maybe both. He was depicted as King Kong, clinging to the Empire State building.

On Dec. 11, 2004, I turned 41 years of age. The very next day, I bought my first Christmas tree.

Now it may not seem to some that buying a Christmas tree should be that big of a deal. After all, according to the National Christmas Tree Association (yes, there is such a group), Americans bought an estimated 24 million real Christmas trees this past holiday season, making it the second year in a row the number of trees purchased went up from the previous year.

Until this year, however, I had not bought one. In fact, until a few weeks ago, I didn’t even celebrate Christmas at all.

Didn’t get a tree, didn’t send out Christmas cards, didn’t buy presents for my family and friends.

Instead, year after year, I simply pretended Christmas didn’t exist.

And for years, my friends—and, later, my wife—put up with my little seasonal eccentricity.

They didn’t have much choice, seeing how I would regularly rail against what I saw to be the hypocrisy of the holiday.