The Wisconsin Supreme Court Race between incumbent Justice David Prosser, who was backed by Republicans and challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg, backed by Democrats had been looking like it was going to go to Kloppenburg.  However, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus then announced she made an error in her vote totals and had failed to count 3,456 votes for Kloppenburg and 11,059 votes for Prosser, giving Prosser a lead of about 7,500 votes--slightly above the margin that would have the state pay recount costs.  Source:  Huffington Post.  When this was first reported, I found it suspicious.  However, Nate Silver has done an analysis saying it points more to incompetence instead of fraud.  Source:  538 Blog NY Times.  However, he failed to touch the fact that Nicolaus's explanation about not hitting save on an Access Database is bull.  Source:  I tried it as well as the Daily Kos.  Access saves data you enter into a table automatically.  You may be able to override the automatic saving using Visual Basic and Macros, which is something Nickolaus should probably know how to do, but why would you program something to override automatic saving?  

There are also several bits of history, that in my opinion, make this "discovery" suspicious:

She took Waukesha County's Election Data Collection and Storage system off the county's network citing security concerns back in 2010, but this prevented county information technology specialists from verifying the system is secure from failure.  Source:  jsonline.com.  Ms. Nickolaus had also been granted immunity during the state [likely Republican] caucus scandal (Source:  Alternet.org), when she was an Assembly Republican Caucus employee.  Given her history, I do find this suspicious and it warrants investigation to determine whether it was incompetence or fraud, and either way Nickolaus should lose her job.

Many of you have now probably heard of the TSA's new policy of being forced going through machines that show your nude body or an aggressive pat-down as well as John Tyner, who told a TSA agent not to touch his junk.  You've also probably heard the TSA chief defending this invasion of privacy.  To learn more details, go to NPR.org  Personally, I think this new "security" measure as useless and unnecessary as well as a form of harassment.  Some people actually liken it to sexual harassment, but I'll leave that up to you to decide.  Here are some facts:

1.  The Underwear Bomber's Father warned the United States About Him.  "His father, a prominent Nigerian banker, recently told officials at the United States Embassy in Nigeria that he was concerned about his son’s increasingly extremist religious views.  As a result of his father’s warning, federal authorities in Washington opened an investigative file and Mr. Abdulmutallab’s name ended up in the American intelligence community’s central repository of information on known or suspected international terrorists."  New York Times, December 27, 2009.

2.  I believe the Bill of Rights is pretty clear on this: 

"Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

"Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

3.  "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin.  Source:  http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

I encourage you to write your Senators and Congressperson as well as your state legislators, and governor and tell them you will not put up with this unconstitutional invasion of privacy.

Through my Googling, I've seen right-wing sites complaining about this, but I have a feeling if a Republican was President they would be asking "What do you have to hide?"

Please note that this post is about the house of the New York State Legislature called the New York State Senate, and not the United States Senate.  The control of the United States Senate is not in doubt.

The Democratic Party was trying to hold on to  a slim 32-30 majority in the State Senate.  As of my last check, there were three races too close to call.  In one, the Democratic candidate was leading and in the other two, the Republican candidates were leading, but there were too many absentee ballots to call the race.  Here are the possibilities:  The State Senate stays at 32D-30R, an even 31D-31R split, a 32R-30D Split, or a 33R-29D Split  Why is control of the State Senate important:  Redistricting and gerrymandering.  You can bet the Republicans will want to gerrymander districts (especially the State Senate and Assembly districts) to keep their districts safe.  To be fair, Democrats like to do this too.  There is also the question of what powers would Lt. Governor-Elect Duffy have in the case of an even 31-31 split?

Governor-Elect Andrew Cuomo is saying that Lt. Governor Duffy would be able to break a leadership tie between Democrats and Republicans, but Republicans are claiming that Lt. Governor Duffy can only break a tie in procedural votes, and they claim the state constitution makes that clear.  (Source:  Buffalo News).  So let's see what the New York State Constitution actually says:

"Article IV, Section 6:   The lieutenant-governor shall possess the same qualifications of eligibility for office as the governor. The lieutenant-governor shall be the president of the senate but shall have only a casting vote therein. The lieutenant- governor shall receive for his or her services an annual salary to be fixed by joint resolution of the senate and assembly. "

Honestly, I don't know who is right although I am leaning towards Cuomo's stance.  All I can find about the definition of a casting vote is that it is a vote made by the presiding officer of a legislature to break a tie.  (Sources:  The Free Dictionary, Answers.com).  To me it seems reasonable that if a 31-31 tie in the State Senate, we should count the Lt. Governor to determine who is actually in the majority.  Since Duffy is a Democrat, my view is the Democratic Party should be considered to be the majority party if the State Senate does end up in a 31-31 deadlock.  If Paladino and Edwards had somehow won and the State Senate ended up deadlocked, I would say the Republicans should be considered the majority even though I wouldn't like it.  As it stands now, we don't yet know who will control the State Senate and thus redistricting.