| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"--sexkitten--" |
| Date: |
29 Apr 2006 11:09:00 PM |
| Object: |
20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection/articles/20things.html
20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA
Did you know....
1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies:
Diebold and ES&S.
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold
2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of
the U.S. voting machine industry.
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0916-04.htm
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html
3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/private_company.html
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html
4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer
and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio
deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml
http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1647886
5. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became
Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/031004Fitrakis/031004fitrakis.html
6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family,
was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate
Ethics Committee.
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=26
http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx
http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000896.php
7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's
vice-presidential candidates.
http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_28/b3689130.htm<br />
http://theindependent.com/stories/052700/new_hagel27.html
8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and
counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.
http://www.essvote.com/HTML/about/about.html
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html
9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any
votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming
out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm
http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2987/041020evotestates/pfindex.html
10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all
of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm
http://www.diebold.com/solutions/default.htm
11. Diebold is based in Ohio.
http://www.diebold.com/aboutus/ataglance/default.htm
12. Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as senior managers and
developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted
50% of the votes in 30 states.
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/301469.shtml
13. Jeff Dean, Diebold's Senior Vice-President and senior programmer on
Diebold's central compiler code, was convicted of 23 counts of felony
theft in the first degree.
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf
14. Diebold Senior Vice-President Jeff Dean was convicted of planting
back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication"
to evade detection over a period of 2 years.
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf
15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the
polls in Ohio.
http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/2638.html
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/10/26/loc_elexoh.html
16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security
was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be
hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie here
<http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov>.)
http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4874190
17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen
voting machines with no paper trail.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml
18. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and
reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65757,00.html
http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOu
t.htm
http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html
http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=
950
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm
19. The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's
brother.
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/local/7628725.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10544-2004Oct29.html
20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush --
have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending
further investigation.
http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOu
t.htm
http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,1080
1,97614,00.html
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/tens_of_thousands.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html
http://uscountvotes.org/
--
--sexkitten--
"I smell blood and an era of prominent madmen."
-W.H. Auden
.
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 02:25:15 PM |
|
|
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush --
have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending
further investigation.
So the voting system chosen by democrats, set up by democrats, run by
democrats, counted and recounted by democrats to squeeze every last vote
out of those three Florida counties that vote heavily democrat was
somehow a republican conspiracy???
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 02:35:54 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) writes:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush --
have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending
further investigation.
So the voting system chosen by democrats, set up by democrats, run by
democrats, counted and recounted by democrats to squeeze every last vote
out of those three Florida counties that vote heavily democrat was
somehow a republican conspiracy???
A study of the 2000 electionshowed that many valid votes for Gore were
rejected because a substantial number of people across the state had
checked Gore's name *and* written in Gore's name. The recording
machines rejected these ballots, although the ballots were in fact
complete legal and the intentions of these voters were clear.
Gore won the popular vote in Florida and the court system gave the
state to Bush anyway, due to Republican game-playing that resulted
in the election being stolen.
I previously posted a URL to a University of Florida web page
describing the analysis. Search for it if you are interested in
further details.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 04:14:22 PM |
|
|
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
--sexkitten-- <ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush --
have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending
further investigation.
So the voting system chosen by democrats, set up by democrats, run by
democrats, counted and recounted by democrats to squeeze every last vote
out of those three Florida counties that vote heavily democrat was
somehow a republican conspiracy???
A study of the 2000 electionshowed that many valid votes for Gore were
rejected because a substantial number of people across the state had
checked Gore's name *and* written in Gore's name. The recording
machines rejected these ballots, although the ballots were in fact
complete legal and the intentions of these voters were clear.
Gore won the popular vote in Florida
No he didn't. The final count proved that if Gore had managed to kick to
out the overseas military votes he would have still lost.
and the court system gave the state to Bush anyway, due to Republican
game-playing that resulted in the election being stolen.
These are the tactics that Democrats use to steal close elections.
All across the country, counties are divided up evenly between democrats
and republicans. Democrats get to appoint election officials for
counties that vote heavily democrat; Republicans get to choose election
officials for counties that vote heavily republican.
The election officials in those three counties in Florida were chosen
by, guess who, Democrats!! They are the ones who chose the election
system in those counties and republicans simply agreed to it. So when
you say the system wasn't fair......
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
DEMOCRATS SET UP THE CHAD SYSTEM IN THOSE COUNTIES!!!!!
Hello, got it now?? And the press is perfectly fine to allow you to go
on thinking the opposite forever.
I previously posted a URL to a University of Florida web page
describing the analysis. Search for it if you are interested in
further details.
I'm not going to do a lot of digging to prove your point, especially
when you don't seem to understand the issue to begin with.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 05:02:30 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
A study of the 2000 electionshowed that many valid votes for Gore were
rejected because a substantial number of people across the state had
checked Gore's name *and* written in Gore's name. The recording
machines rejected these ballots, although the ballots were in fact
complete legal and the intentions of these voters were clear.
Gore won the popular vote in Florida
No he didn't. The final count proved that if Gore had managed to kick to
out the overseas military votes he would have still lost.
Gore actually won, regardless of Republican lies to the contrary.
See
<http://www.research.fsu.edu/researchr/winter2005/features/battlefield.html>.
and the court system gave the state to Bush anyway, due to Republican
game-playing that resulted in the election being stolen.
These are the tactics that Democrats use to steal close elections.
We were talking about a specific election and the Democrats did not
steal that one because a Republican was appointed to the office.
The election officials in those three counties in Florida were chosen
by, guess who, Democrats!! They are the ones who chose the election
system in those counties and republicans simply agreed to it. So when
you say the system wasn't fair......
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
<10-fold Infantile repetition of same line snipped.>
Liar. See the URL above. The problem occurred statewide. In fact,
if they had just recounted the precincts Gore asked for, that would
not have been enough to put the vote in his favor. It was only
afterwards that the real problem was known - people checking off
a candidate and then writing the same candidate's name in to be
sure.
DEMOCRATS SET UP THE CHAD SYSTEM IN THOSE COUNTIES!!!!!
It had nothing to do with "chad", and my original message said nothing
about "chad".
Hello, got it now?? And the press is perfectly fine to allow you to go
on thinking the opposite forever.
I previously posted a URL to a University of Florida web page
describing the analysis. Search for it if you are interested in
further details.
I'm not going to do a lot of digging to prove your point, especially
when you don't seem to understand the issue to begin with.
Typical head-in-the sand Republican - I just looked it up again and
it took less than a minute to find. But quite frankly, I'm getting
just a bit tired of having to do that over and over as you people
continually post the same lies over and over and over.
The facts are that Gore won and the 2000 presidential election was
in fact stolen.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 08:42:05 PM |
|
|
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
A study of the 2000 electionshowed that many valid votes for Gore were
rejected because a substantial number of people across the state had
checked Gore's name *and* written in Gore's name. The recording
machines rejected these ballots, although the ballots were in fact
complete legal and the intentions of these voters were clear.
Gore won the popular vote in Florida
No he didn't. The final count proved that if Gore had managed to kick to
out the overseas military votes he would have still lost.
Gore actually won, regardless of Republican lies to the contrary.
See
<http://www.research.fsu.edu/researchr/winter2005/features/battlefield.html>.
uhhh, do you have a source that isn't funded by the liberal democrat
controlled Department of Education???
The people who operated the election system in those counties were
appointed by DEMOCRRAT florida state legislatures. So if there are any
irregularities in those counties it's the fault of democrats.
And i'm not going to read that entire artlcle without you at least
telling me what i'm looking for.
and the court system gave the state to Bush anyway, due to Republican
game-playing that resulted in the election being stolen.
These are the tactics that Democrats use to steal close elections.
We were talking about a specific election and the Democrats did not
steal that one because a Republican was appointed to the office.
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
The election officials in those three counties in Florida were chosen
by, guess who, Democrats!! They are the ones who chose the election
system in those counties and republicans simply agreed to it. So when
you say the system wasn't fair......
YOU ARE SAYING DEMOCRATS WERE UNFAIR TO THEMSELVES!!!!
<10-fold Infantile repetition of same line snipped.>
Liar. See the URL above. The problem occurred statewide. In fact,
if they had just recounted the precincts Gore asked for, that would
not have been enough to put the vote in his favor. It was only
afterwards that the real problem was known - people checking off
a candidate and then writing the same candidate's name in to be
sure.
Both Democrats and Republicans agreed to the system with it's problems
and inaccuracies. They both also accepted that there is an element of
chance. They're supposed to let the chips fall where they may, not to
send in the lawyers and fight tooth and nail over every vote during
close elections.
The problems that exist with that voting system also occur in counties
that vote heavily republican. Should we recount those counties too?
Unless there's some indication that one side cheated (like democrats
changing the counting rules during the counting) they don't have
anything to complain about a system they chose.
DEMOCRATS SET UP THE CHAD SYSTEM IN THOSE COUNTIES!!!!!
It had nothing to do with "chad", and my original message said nothing
about "chad".
Then what the hell was all that about chads in the news??
Hello, got it now?? And the press is perfectly fine to allow you to go
on thinking the opposite forever.
I previously posted a URL to a University of Florida web page
describing the analysis. Search for it if you are interested in
further details.
I'm not going to do a lot of digging to prove your point, especially
when you don't seem to understand the issue to begin with.
Typical head-in-the sand Republican - I just looked it up again and
it took less than a minute to find. But quite frankly, I'm getting
just a bit tired of having to do that over and over as you people
continually post the same lies over and over and over.
The facts are that Gore won and the 2000 presidential election was
in fact stolen.
The most accurate count (by democrats) was the first one. It's when
Gore's army of lawyers decended with the ENTIRE WEIGHT OF THE ELECTION
sitting on those 3 little counties that the count became distorted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
01 May 2006 09:45:19 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
(the_blogologist) writes:
See
<http://www.research.fsu.edu/researchr/winter2005/features/battlefield.html>.
uhhh, do you have a source that isn't funded by the liberal democrat
controlled Department of Education???
The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago
is "controlled by the Department of Education"? What sort of
complete and utter idiot are you?
From the article referenced by this URL:
One of the most interesting points you make in the book is
that the focus on undervotes (ballots containing no vote for
president)---the hanging, dimpled and otherwise pregnant
chads---was misplaced. Instead, you explain that a study by
the National Opinion Research Center at the University of
Chicago, which looked at all the ballots that were initially
rejected on election night 2000, revealed a surprise: most of
these uncounted votes were in fact discarded because they were
over-votes, instances of two votes for president on one
ballot. What do you think the NORC study tells us about the
election?
followed by (as a reply to this question)
Everybody had thought that the chads were where all the bad
ballots were, but it turned out that the ones that were the
most decisive were write-in ballots where people would check
Gore and write Gore in, and the machine kicked those
out. There were 175,000 votes overall that were so-called
”Čspoiled ballots.”É About two-thirds of the spoiled ballots
were over-votes; many or most of them would have been write-in
over-votes, where people had punched and written in a
candidate”Ēs name. And nobody looked at this, not even the
Florida Supreme Court in the last decision it made requiring a
statewide recount. Nobody had thought about it except Judge
Terry Lewis, who was overseeing the statewide recount when it
was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The write-in over-votes
have really not gotten much attention. Those votes are not
ambiguous. When you see Gore picked and then Gore written in,
there”Ēs not a question in your mind who this person was
voting for.
The people who operated the election system in those counties were
appointed by DEMOCRRAT florida state legislatures. So if there are any
irregularities in those counties it's the fault of democrats.
It was not just "those counties", and I don't give a flying f___ if
it was "the fault of democrats". This isn't about political parties.
It is about "we the people" having the right to a fair election.
And i'm not going to read that entire artlcle without you at least
telling me what i'm looking for.
I gave you a quote above, but you just admitted that you hadn't even
read the damn thing before criticizing it as some sort of political
hit piece. It isn't. It is merely an interview with a researcher, who
has an incentive to be honest if only because his peers will call him
on it if he isn't.
We were talking about a specific election and the Democrats did not
steal that one because a Republican was appointed to the office.
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
It doesn't matter who did the counting. The Republicans did everything
they could to run out the clock and prevent a fair vote. And that is
the historical fact of the matter.
DEMOCRATS SET UP THE CHAD SYSTEM IN THOSE COUNTIES!!!!!
It had nothing to do with "chad", and my original message said nothing
about "chad".
Then what the hell was all that about chads in the news??
Write to your favorite editor and ask (I don't represent the press).
Send him the URL and ask why they didn't notice. Or read the article
to see why nobody noticed. It isn't all that long.
The facts are that Gore won and the 2000 presidential election was
in fact stolen.
The most accurate count (by democrats) was the first one. It's when
Gore's army of lawyers decended with the ENTIRE WEIGHT OF THE ELECTION
sitting on those 3 little counties that the count became distorted.
No. Voting machines rejected large numbers of valid ballots for
understandable reasons, and it was close enough for a recount, and
it was not just "3 little counties" that were the problem.
So to be blunt, you really don't know what you are talking about.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
02 May 2006 02:50:12 AM |
|
|
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
It doesn't matter who did the counting. The Republicans did everything
they could to run out the clock and prevent a fair vote. And that is
the historical fact of the matter.
All the other counties finished their counting on time.
If anyone is to blame, it's democrats.
DEMOCRATS SET UP THE CHAD SYSTEM IN THOSE COUNTIES!!!!!
It had nothing to do with "chad", and my original message said nothing
about "chad".
Then what the hell was all that about chads in the news??
Write to your favorite editor and ask (I don't represent the press).
Send him the URL and ask why they didn't notice. Or read the article
to see why nobody noticed. It isn't all that long.
I'm not doing any such thing.
The facts are that Gore won and the 2000 presidential election was
in fact stolen.
The most accurate count (by democrats) was the first one. It's when
Gore's army of lawyers decended with the ENTIRE WEIGHT OF THE ELECTION
sitting on those 3 little counties that the count became distorted.
No. Voting machines rejected large numbers of valid ballots for
understandable reasons, and it was close enough for a recount, and
it was not just "3 little counties" that were the problem.
So to be blunt, you really don't know what you are talking about.
Both sides knew that election system had problems, but knew it was
equally flawed to both sides and also had an element of chance. It
wasn't designed for accuracy, but designed to be fair and prevent
corruption.
If Democrats had a problem with the chad system they should have
complained before the election and fixed it. If democrats are going to
play this game then every close election will fall into quagmire. They
should either create a system that is perfectly accurate, or wait until
all precients have turned in their votes before reporting the outcome.
That way the entire weight of a presidental election won't be dumped on
3 little counties. Democrats shouldn't be able to complain about
problems that democrats caused.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 12:34:30 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
(the_blogologist) writes:
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
It doesn't matter who did the counting. The Republicans did everything
they could to run out the clock and prevent a fair vote. And that is
the historical fact of the matter.
All the other counties finished their counting on time.
If anyone is to blame, it's democrats.
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The most accurate count (by democrats) was the first one. It's when
Gore's army of lawyers decended with the ENTIRE WEIGHT OF THE ELECTION
sitting on those 3 little counties that the count became distorted.
No. Voting machines rejected large numbers of valid ballots for
understandable reasons, and it was close enough for a recount, and
it was not just "3 little counties" that were the problem.
So to be blunt, you really don't know what you are talking about.
Both sides knew that election system had problems, but knew it was
equally flawed to both sides and also had an element of chance. It
wasn't designed for accuracy, but designed to be fair and prevent
corruption.
Nonsense. This is not about "both sides" but about the citizens of
the U.S. having their choices respected, and a fair and accurate
recount could have been made if it wasn't stopped.
If Democrats had a problem with the chad system they should have
complained before the election and fixed it.
As I told you several times, the actual problem had nothing to
do with "chad". It was people checking off a candidate *and*
writing the same candidate's name in for emphasis. Under Florida
law, such a ballot is valid. BTW, voters did this for both Bush
and for Gore, but for some reason, it was more common among those
who voted for Gore.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
That is simply a bald-faced lie. I gave you documentation (a URL)
detailing what the problem was and you are simply trying to deny the
truth. The fact is that Al Gore actually did win the election.
U.S. History, when finally written, will describe how this fiasco
led to the installation of the worst president in over 100 years.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 02:04:22 PM |
|
|
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
It doesn't matter who did the counting. The Republicans did everything
they could to run out the clock and prevent a fair vote. And that is
the historical fact of the matter.
All the other counties finished their counting on time.
If anyone is to blame, it's democrats.
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The voting system is not set up for accuracy, it's set up for fairness.
The time limit was put into place to prevent exactly what Gore attempted
to do, which was tweak the counting process to squeeze more votes out of
cherry picked counties.
Nonsense. This is not about "both sides" but about the citizens of
the U.S. having their choices respected,
Then how come votes in counties that vote heavily republican weren't
equally respected??
and a fair and accurate
recount could have been made if it wasn't stopped.
This was Gore trying to squeeze every last vote out of heavily democrat
counties in order to win a close election.
If Democrats had a problem with the chad system they should have
complained before the election and fixed it.
As I told you several times, the actual problem had nothing to
do with "chad". It was people checking off a candidate *and*
writing the same candidate's name in for emphasis. Under Florida
law, such a ballot is valid. BTW, voters did this for both Bush
and for Gore, but for some reason, it was more common among those
who voted for Gore.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
That is simply a bald-faced lie. I gave you documentation (a URL)
detailing what the problem was and you are simply trying to deny the
truth.
I'm not going to reat that whole thing without you telling me what i'm
looking for. I wasted enough time reading URLs which don't prove the
point or even have little to do with the point.
The fact is that Al Gore actually did win the election.
He lost.
U.S. History, when finally written, will describe how this fiasco
led to the installation of the worst president in over 100 years.
Carter was the worst president in my lifetime. You know he still holds
the record for the "Misery Index", a term he coined?!!
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3699/carterlegacy1uh.jpg
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 02:35:40 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
(the_blogologist) writes:
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The voting system is not set up for accuracy, it's set up for fairness.
The time limit was put into place to prevent exactly what Gore attempted
to do, which was tweak the counting process to squeeze more votes out of
cherry picked counties.
Go back and read the damn article. It talked about the vote for the
whole state, not the vote for selected counties (and an accurate
count in the counties Gore asked for would not have change the
results enough for Gore to win: you needed to check the rejected
ballots over the whole state).
Nonsense. This is not about "both sides" but about the citizens of
the U.S. having their choices respected,
Then how come votes in counties that vote heavily republican weren't
equally respected??
Because the Republicans blocked a recount - those "heavily Republican"
counties would have tipped the election in Gore's favor if a recount
was done.
The reason, as the article pointed out, was that statewide, quite a
few voters checked the box (punched a hole, whatever) for Bush or
Gore, and then *also* wrote Bush or Gore's name in respectively for
emphasis. Gore voters for some reason did this more often than Bush
voters, and the voting machines rejected those valid ballots because
the machines were programmed under the assumption that a write-in vote
was for someone not on the ballot. A manual recount would catch that,
and the votes in this case are completely unambiguous.
This was Gore trying to squeeze every last vote out of heavily democrat
counties in order to win a close election.
That is *not* the issue, you moron. See the comment above. I gave
you the URL describing the actual issue and you for some strange reason
will not accept the facts. And that makes you an idiot.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
That is simply a bald-faced lie. I gave you documentation (a URL)
detailing what the problem was and you are simply trying to deny the
truth.
I'm not going to reat that whole thing without you telling me what i'm
looking for. I wasted enough time reading URLs which don't prove the
point or even have little to do with the point.
The fact is that Al Gore actually did win the election.
He lost.
Gore won and was robbed of the presidency. And that is what you
will read 50 years from now in history books.
U.S. History, when finally written, will describe how this fiasco
led to the installation of the worst president in over 100 years.
Carter was the worst president in my lifetime. You know he still holds
the record for the "Misery Index", a term he coined?!!
None of which was Carter's fault, but if you want a president with a
high "misery index", it could very well be the next one, who will be
stuck with the bill Bush has run up. It's like hiring a financial
advisor who suddenly starts coming up with all this money you didn't
know you had until you realize that he took out a fifth morgage on
your home to get it. Then the next financial advisor gets the
"high misery index" as he tries to figure out how to pay off the
loan.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Weasel" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 03:52:22 PM |
|
|
No One wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The voting system is not set up for accuracy, it's set up for fairness.
The time limit was put into place to prevent exactly what Gore attempted
to do, which was tweak the counting process to squeeze more votes out of
cherry picked counties.
Go back and read the damn article. It talked about the vote for the
whole state, not the vote for selected counties (and an accurate
count in the counties Gore asked for would not have change the
results enough for Gore to win: you needed to check the rejected
ballots over the whole state).
That article is bunch of bogus nonsense. The author ignores the rulings
in Bush v. Palm Beach, Bush v. Gore, and Broward v. Hogan, then inserts
his own opinion. His opinion is meaningless because it is not based in
law. He also ignores the fact that the NORC said that their study did
not identify a winner.
As an example "Yet if you looked at the law and if you looked at the
case law, what Florida had consistently said was if you can count the
votes, you must count the votes. You cannot penalize the voters for
mistakes that the administrators make or that the law may make. You
really have to give the voters the advantage."
Broward v. Hogan found that voter error, such as hanging chads, is not
a valid legal reason to conduct a recount. He claims that this is the
"mistakes that the administrators", when it is actually voter error. He
has to make this claim because if he relied on the facts, he would have
to admit that Florida Code does not force such recounts.
Further, "if you can count the votes, you must count the votes". By
what standard? Dimpled chads?? Again, if the state of Florida follows
the law, those are invalid ballots, and are not to be recounted.
Nonsense. This is not about "both sides" but about the citizens of
the U.S. having their choices respected,
Then how come votes in counties that vote heavily republican weren't
equally respected??
Because the Republicans blocked a recount - those "heavily Republican"
counties would have tipped the election in Gore's favor if a recount
was done.
This false for two reasons. First, if the state of Florida used the
election standards and practices as required under 3 U.S.C. section 5,
there would never have been a recount. Ballots that are spoiled because
of voter error are not legal votes. The court in Broward v. Hogan
refused to order a recount to search for such ballots, even in a race
that was decided by less than 6 votes.
Second, the NORC study is a partial recount, which does not follow
Florida Code. Just as the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court,
this type of recount would not have settled the issue, nor would it
have changed the outcome.
The reason, as the article pointed out, was that statewide, quite a
few voters checked the box (punched a hole, whatever) for Bush or
Gore, and then *also* wrote Bush or Gore's name in respectively for
emphasis. Gore voters for some reason did this more often than Bush
voters, and the voting machines rejected those valid ballots because
the machines were programmed under the assumption that a write-in vote
was for someone not on the ballot. A manual recount would catch that,
and the votes in this case are completely unambiguous.
Even if the case law was changed, recounting these ballots would not
have changed the outcome of the election.
This was Gore trying to squeeze every last vote out of heavily democrat
counties in order to win a close election.
That is *not* the issue, you moron. See the comment above. I gave
you the URL describing the actual issue and you for some strange reason
will not accept the facts. And that makes you an idiot.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
That is simply a bald-faced lie. I gave you documentation (a URL)
detailing what the problem was and you are simply trying to deny the
truth.
I'm not going to reat that whole thing without you telling me what i'm
looking for. I wasted enough time reading URLs which don't prove the
point or even have little to do with the point.
The fact is that Al Gore actually did win the election.
He lost.
Gore won and was robbed of the presidency. And that is what you
will read 50 years from now in history books.
Gore was not robbed, he lost a close election. The only reason the
numbers are so close is that he was able to have illegally counted
ballots included in the totals, and had legal ballots that favored Bush
thrown out.
I would agree that if we let revisionist write the history books, they
would make up a story to say Gore won.
U.S. History, when finally written, will describe how this fiasco
led to the installation of the worst president in over 100 years.
Carter was the worst president in my lifetime. You know he still holds
the record for the "Misery Index", a term he coined?!!
None of which was Carter's fault, but if you want a president with a
high "misery index", it could very well be the next one, who will be
stuck with the bill Bush has run up. It's like hiring a financial
advisor who suddenly starts coming up with all this money you didn't
know you had until you realize that he took out a fifth morgage on
your home to get it. Then the next financial advisor gets the
"high misery index" as he tries to figure out how to pay off the
loan.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Weasel" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 03:52:22 PM |
|
|
No One wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The voting system is not set up for accuracy, it's set up for fairness.
The time limit was put into place to prevent exactly what Gore attempted
to do, which was tweak the counting process to squeeze more votes out of
cherry picked counties.
Go back and read the damn article. It talked about the vote for the
whole state, not the vote for selected counties (and an accurate
count in the counties Gore asked for would not have change the
results enough for Gore to win: you needed to check the rejected
ballots over the whole state).
That article is bunch of bogus nonsense. The author ignores the rulings
in Bush v. Palm Beach, Bush v. Gore, and Broward v. Hogan, then inserts
his own opinion. His opinion is meaningless because it is not based in
law. He also ignores the fact that the NORC said that their study did
not identify a winner.
As an example "Yet if you looked at the law and if you looked at the
case law, what Florida had consistently said was if you can count the
votes, you must count the votes. You cannot penalize the voters for
mistakes that the administrators make or that the law may make. You
really have to give the voters the advantage."
Broward v. Hogan found that voter error, such as hanging chads, is not
a valid legal reason to conduct a recount. He claims that this is the
"mistakes that the administrators", when it is actually voter error. He
has to make this claim because if he relied on the facts, he would have
to admit that Florida Code does not force such recounts.
Further, "if you can count the votes, you must count the votes". By
what standard? Dimpled chads?? Again, if the state of Florida follows
the law, those are invalid ballots, and are not to be recounted.
Nonsense. This is not about "both sides" but about the citizens of
the U.S. having their choices respected,
Then how come votes in counties that vote heavily republican weren't
equally respected??
Because the Republicans blocked a recount - those "heavily Republican"
counties would have tipped the election in Gore's favor if a recount
was done.
This false for two reasons. First, if the state of Florida used the
election standards and practices as required under 3 U.S.C. section 5,
there would never have been a recount. Ballots that are spoiled because
of voter error are not legal votes. The court in Broward v. Hogan
refused to order a recount to search for such ballots, even in a race
that was decided by less than 6 votes.
Second, the NORC study is a partial recount, which does not follow
Florida Code. Just as the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court,
this type of recount would not have settled the issue, nor would it
have changed the outcome.
The reason, as the article pointed out, was that statewide, quite a
few voters checked the box (punched a hole, whatever) for Bush or
Gore, and then *also* wrote Bush or Gore's name in respectively for
emphasis. Gore voters for some reason did this more often than Bush
voters, and the voting machines rejected those valid ballots because
the machines were programmed under the assumption that a write-in vote
was for someone not on the ballot. A manual recount would catch that,
and the votes in this case are completely unambiguous.
Even if the case law was changed, recounting these ballots would not
have changed the outcome of the election.
This was Gore trying to squeeze every last vote out of heavily democrat
counties in order to win a close election.
That is *not* the issue, you moron. See the comment above. I gave
you the URL describing the actual issue and you for some strange reason
will not accept the facts. And that makes you an idiot.
There was nothing wrong with that election until Gore's election
mechanics showed up. Yeah it was flawed, but it was equally flawed.
That is simply a bald-faced lie. I gave you documentation (a URL)
detailing what the problem was and you are simply trying to deny the
truth.
I'm not going to reat that whole thing without you telling me what i'm
looking for. I wasted enough time reading URLs which don't prove the
point or even have little to do with the point.
The fact is that Al Gore actually did win the election.
He lost.
Gore won and was robbed of the presidency. And that is what you
will read 50 years from now in history books.
Gore was not robbed, he lost a close election. The only reason the
numbers are so close is that he was able to have illegally counted
ballots included in the totals, and had legal ballots that favored Bush
thrown out.
I would agree that if we let revisionist write the history books, they
would make up a story to say Gore won.
U.S. History, when finally written, will describe how this fiasco
led to the installation of the worst president in over 100 years.
Carter was the worst president in my lifetime. You know he still holds
the record for the "Misery Index", a term he coined?!!
None of which was Carter's fault, but if you want a president with a
high "misery index", it could very well be the next one, who will be
stuck with the bill Bush has run up. It's like hiring a financial
advisor who suddenly starts coming up with all this money you didn't
know you had until you realize that he took out a fifth morgage on
your home to get it. Then the next financial advisor gets the
"high misery index" as he tries to figure out how to pay off the
loan.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
05 May 2006 11:07:36 PM |
|
|
the_blogologist <nobody@nowheres.com> wrote:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
No One <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:
nobody@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) writes:
You mean Katherine Harris? She didn't do the counting. She just didn't
grand a natural disaster extension to Gore's election mechanics.
It doesn't matter who did the counting. The Republicans did everything
they could to run out the clock and prevent a fair vote. And that is
the historical fact of the matter.
All the other counties finished their counting on time.
If anyone is to blame, it's democrats.
Wrong. You didn't read the URL. It was not "finishing their counting"
but not realizing that there were enough machine-rejected but valid
ballots to change the outcome of the election. This was all covered
in some detail in the article I cited (which you apparently refuse to
read).
The voting system is not set up for accuracy, it's set up for fairness.
The time limit was put into place to prevent exactly what Gore attempted
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
06 May 2006 08:37:20 PM |
|
|
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 02:47:27 PM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney <bibon@rālant.org> wrote:
rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Anti-American fascists cannot tolerate any dissent or criticism.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 11:50:09 PM |
|
|
On 07 May 2006 19:47:27 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney <bibon@rālant.org> wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Anti-American fascists cannot tolerate any dissent or criticism.
That's what I keep telling you -- your rhetoric is a dead giveaway
that you hate America and everything it stands for. Even in time of
crisis you look for reasons to be critical and pounce on the littlest
fault and blow it all out of proportion. You are traitorous in the
worst sense of the word.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
08 May 2006 09:33:51 PM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney <bibon@rālant.org> wrote:
rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney <bibon@rālant.org> wrote:
rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Anti-American fascists cannot tolerate any dissent or criticism.
That's what I keep telling you -- your rhetoric is a dead giveaway
The fascist cannot tolerate ANY critivism of the government and
believes that to criticize the Glorious Leader is to criticize the
nation.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
08 May 2006 07:36:07 AM |
|
|
In article <pdjt52p65me2ct7k0bo4qdsub3a69bq2or@4ax.com>,
Bitchin' Bonney <bibon@rālant.org> wrote:
On 07 May 2006 19:47:27 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
Anti-American fascists cannot tolerate any dissent or criticism.
That's what I keep telling you -- your rhetoric is a dead giveaway
that you hate America and everything it stands for.
that's the recommended response from the anti-american fascist
textbook.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
06 May 2006 08:40:51 PM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
I'm pleased and surprised that you agree with the assessment of the
neocons as anti-American terrorists.
--
--sexkitten--
The more laws and order are made prominent,
The more thieves and robbers there will be.
-Lao-tzu
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
06 May 2006 11:33:24 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 May 2006 18:40:51 -0700, --sexkitten--
<ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
I'm pleased and surprised that you agree with the assessment of the
neocons as anti-American terrorists.
Go ***** Yourself. -***** Cheney
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 05:35:15 AM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2006 18:40:51 -0700, --sexkitten--
<ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
I'm pleased and surprised that you agree with the assessment of the
neocons as anti-American terrorists.
Go ***** Yourself. -***** Cheney
You want him to go ***** himself?
--
--sexkitten--
The more laws and order are made prominent,
The more thieves and robbers there will be.
-Lao-tzu
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Natalie Clifford Barney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 02:06:02 AM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2006 18:40:51 -0700, --sexkitten--
<ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
I'm pleased and surprised that you agree with the assessment of the
neocons as anti-American terrorists.
Go ***** Yourself. -***** Cheney
I may later. Tonight I would prefer the bored wife of a neo-con politician
--
Natalie Clifford Barney
Cumann Na mBan-1916
Membre; L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"If too little of the love I invoke appears in this book, it is because I
have better spent it elsewhere. Here there remain only fragments."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 10:37:55 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 May 2006 07:06:02 GMT, Natalie Clifford Barney
<SalonHostess@20RueJacob.fr> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2006 18:40:51 -0700, --sexkitten--
<ladyhawk_twoFILTER@hotmail.com> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
I'm pleased and surprised that you agree with the assessment of the
neocons as anti-American terrorists.
Go ***** Yourself. -***** Cheney
I may later. Tonight I would prefer the bored wife of a neo-con politician
Of course they are board. Their husbands are hard at work doing the
work of the people. While the democraps stay home and gig their ugly
wives.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Natalie Clifford Barney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 02:04:32 AM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
--
Natalie Clifford Barney
Cumann Na mBan-1916
Membre; L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"If too little of the love I invoke appears in this book, it is because I
have better spent it elsewhere. Here there remain only fragments."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Burns" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 02:31:28 AM |
|
|
Natalie Clifford Barney wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
--
To the neo-cons, anybody who isn't a wild-eyed fundamentalist
Christian Stars & Bars waving Bushbot is a traitor deserving
of torture/death.
The right-wing Republicans are the ones on the outs right now....Dubya
has a 33% approval rating nationwide, with the rating as low as 24% in
Rhode Island (a state the GOP loves to hate on a cultural level).
I think only Wyoming, Utah and a couple of other states still have a
50%+ approval rating for Bush.
Richard.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Boy Toy" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 05:20:02 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 May 2006 07:31:28 GMT, Richard Burns
<richarddburns@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
<knh7g.73639$H71.35936@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>
Natalie Clifford Barney wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
--
To the neo-cons, anybody who isn't a wild-eyed fundamentalist
Christian Stars & Bars waving Bushbot is a traitor deserving
of torture/death.
The right-wing Republicans are the ones on the outs right now....Dubya
has a 33% approval rating nationwide, with the rating as low as 24% in
Rhode Island (a state the GOP loves to hate on a cultural level).
I think only Wyoming, Utah and a couple of other states still have a
50%+ approval rating for Bush.
Richard.
I think any numbers out of Wyoming and Utah would be skewed. People
are not going to admit to being anything but mindless conforming
zombies there. You can get violently murdered just for being
different in Wyoming or Utah.
In other words, typical fundie NeoCon outposts.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Natalie Clifford Barney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 11:50:29 AM |
|
|
Richard Burns wrote:
Natalie Clifford Barney wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
--
To the neo-cons, anybody who isn't a wild-eyed fundamentalist
Christian Stars & Bars waving Bushbot is a traitor deserving
of torture/death.
The right-wing Republicans are the ones on the outs right now....Dubya
has a 33% approval rating nationwide, with the rating as low as 24% in
Rhode Island (a state the GOP loves to hate on a cultural level).
I think only Wyoming, Utah and a couple of other states still have a
50%+ approval rating for Bush.
Richard.
Richard,
Undoubtedly true. But I will defy anyone to question my love for the US or
the sense of duty that as liberals we instill in our children.
John Kerry served in Vietnam
George Bush got a cushy position in the air guard that he didnt show up
for,,,
My son, an engineer , is going to Iraq.
Show me the son of a leading neo-con minister who is doing the same...
--
Natalie Clifford Barney
Cumann Na mBan-1916
Membre; L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"If too little of the love I invoke appears in this book, it is because I
have better spent it elsewhere. Here there remain only fragments."
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 10:22:56 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 07 May 2006 07:04:32 GMT, Natalie Clifford Barney
<SalonHostess@20RueJacob.fr> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
Both my son and I served honorably. I have every right to express any
opinion about those who are, in their rhetoric, anti-American and
consequently, enemies within the gates.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Natalie Clifford Barney" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 11:58:52 AM |
|
|
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On Sun, 07 May 2006 07:04:32 GMT, Natalie Clifford Barney
<SalonHostess@20RueJacob.fr> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The anti-American
allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are you
all wind and smoke?
Both my son and I served honorably. I have every right to express any
opinion about those who are, in their rhetoric, anti-American and
consequently, enemies within the gates.
By the way, did either of you serve in a combat zone riddled with
terrorists?
--
Natalie Clifford Barney
Cumann Na mBan-1916
Membre; L' Academie des Femmes
One of the Lesbian Immortals of the Left Bank
We never die....
"If too little of the love I invoke appears in this book, it is because I
have better spent it elsewhere. Here there remain only fragments."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA |
07 May 2006 12:00:46 PM |
|
|
In News 445E274B.392351A8@20RueJacob.fr,, Natalie Clifford Barney at
SalonHostess@20RueJacob.fr, typed this:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On Sun, 07 May 2006 07:04:32 GMT, Natalie Clifford Barney
<SalonHostess@20RueJacob.fr> wrote:
Bitchin' Bonney wrote:
On 06 May 2006 04:07:36 GMT, (Ray Fischer)
wrote:
The neocon tries to justify ignoring the wishes of the voters.
Democracy and America are less important to the right-wing cultist
than making sure their cult leaders are in power.
So says one -- so say all enemies within the walls. The
anti-American allies of terrorist
Bugger off!
I am a Lesbian and a liberal, my son is a liberal but he is serving
dutifully in the US Army and is due to go to Iraq.
Have you or any of YOUR children served? Or like most meocons, are
you all wind and smoke?
Both my son and I served honorably. I have every right to express
any opinion about those who are, in their rhetoric, anti-American and
consequently, enemies within the gates.
By the way, did either of you serve in a combat zone riddled with
terrorists?
In a war zone everyone is a terrorist. You're terrorizing them, they're
terrorizing you. That's the way a war zone is, unfortunately.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. - Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
