| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
01 Nov 2004 07:37:34 PM |
| Object: |
supreme court rules.... |
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
.
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
01 Nov 2004 08:56:05 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
01 Nov 2004 09:04:10 PM |
|
|
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
Very honest of you, how about planning to watch if any left wing goons show
up?
You do realize both sides have goons don't you?
Here in our area, there have been many vandalizing property that has
Bush/Cheney signs.
Some even caught on film. But you probably don't believe it is possible do
you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 08:22:22 AM |
|
|
In article <VtWdnSG229_NZRvcRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
Very honest of you, how about planning to watch if any left wing goons show
up?
You do realize both sides have goons don't you?
Here in our area, there have been many vandalizing property that has
Bush/Cheney signs.
Some even caught on film. But you probably don't believe it is possible do
you?
Yup, I do realize both sides have goons. Campaign posters for both
sides have been vandalized. That's certainly wrong. The election is
not hotly contested in my state (NJ) so there is less of that kind
of stuff going on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 08:29:19 AM |
|
|
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-5AA4B9.09222202112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <VtWdnSG229_NZRvcRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is
named
a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
Very honest of you, how about planning to watch if any left wing goons
show
up?
You do realize both sides have goons don't you?
Here in our area, there have been many vandalizing property that has
Bush/Cheney signs.
Some even caught on film. But you probably don't believe it is possible
do
you?
Yup, I do realize both sides have goons. Campaign posters for both
sides have been vandalized. That's certainly wrong. The election is
not hotly contested in my state (NJ) so there is less of that kind
of stuff going on.
Good, glad you at least can recognize that both sides have goons.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Some-Writer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 09:48:44 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:22:22 -0500, Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote:
In article <VtWdnSG229_NZRvcRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
Very honest of you, how about planning to watch if any left wing goons show
up?
You do realize both sides have goons don't you?
Here in our area, there have been many vandalizing property that has
Bush/Cheney signs.
Some even caught on film. But you probably don't believe it is possible do
you?
Yup, I do realize both sides have goons. Campaign posters for both
sides have been vandalized. That's certainly wrong. The election is
not hotly contested in my state (NJ) so there is less of that kind
of stuff going on.
Our neighbor proudly bearing the Kerry, Red Sox "We believe it" sign
hasn't experienced a thing -- people have more important, immediate
things to worry about.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 08:49:20 AM |
|
|
Shawn Hearn wrote:
In article <VtWdnSG229_NZRvcRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
Very honest of you, how about planning to watch if any left wing goons show
up?
You do realize both sides have goons don't you?
Here in our area, there have been many vandalizing property that has
Bush/Cheney signs.
Some even caught on film. But you probably don't believe it is possible do
you?
Yup, I do realize both sides have goons. Campaign posters for both
sides have been vandalized. That's certainly wrong. The election is
not hotly contested in my state (NJ) so there is less of that kind
of stuff going on.
I've been a little surprised by it. I'm in NY, which is NOT a republican
state, but I constantly see Kerry/Edwards signs torn to shreds alongside
the road.
I wonder if it's NY's lone republican doing all of it? :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cleopatra" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 12:24:03 PM |
|
|
Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<srhi-AB8AF8.21560501112004@news-40.giganews.com>...
In article <Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>,
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Believe it or not, I live in an apartment building that will be used as
a polling place (the lobby). I have election day off from work and I
do plan to watch to see if these GOP goons show up in my polling place.
The presumption being in the Victocrat mind, of course, that any
little old lady showing up to vote Republican qualifies as a "goon."
Also, anyone asking you to identify yourself as a registered voter is
also a "goon."
Cleopatra
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Boone" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
01 Nov 2004 09:45:46 PM |
|
|
That's strange, I thought I just heard on the radio they could not.
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9594D1D231A81keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4...
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
01 Nov 2004 08:24:24 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it again?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
01 Nov 2004 09:03:16 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:sdChd.1696$6L5.1274@news01.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where
bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
they did.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Some-Writer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 04:27:12 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it again?
They did -- in 2000.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 09:24:00 AM |
|
|
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:d7oeo0li9h4ff7hndrf2escd10345l5rfm@4ax.com:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where
bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
.
|
|
|
| User: "Some-Writer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 09:46:04 AM |
|
|
On 2 Nov 2004 15:24:00 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:d7oeo0li9h4ff7hndrf2escd10345l5rfm@4ax.com:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where
bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
Does he? Really?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 02:31:36 PM |
|
|
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:usafo05715r71jg8u834aj41dcrabbefol@4ax.com:
On 2 Nov 2004 15:24:00 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:d7oeo0li9h4ff7hndrf2escd10345l5rfm@4ax.com:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where
bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
Does he? Really?
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows, than
many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches for indirect
methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn;t want to face.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:13:19 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:usafo05715r71jg8u834aj41dcrabbefol@4ax.com:
On 2 Nov 2004 15:24:00 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:d7oeo0li9h4ff7hndrf2escd10345l5rfm@4ax.com:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the
gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where
bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
Does he? Really?
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows, than
many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches for indirect
methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn;t want to face.
Thank you, Sigmund Fraud.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:19:04 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:zoVhd.1711$HT1.501@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:usafo05715r71jg8u834aj41dcrabbefol@4ax.com:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if
the gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point
where bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
Does he? Really?
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows,
than many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches
for indirect methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn't want to
face.
Thank you,
you're welcome.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:21:08 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in
news:zoVhd.1711$HT1.501@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Some-Writer <sappywriter@poetic.com> wrote in
news:usafo05715r71jg8u834aj41dcrabbefol@4ax.com:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if
the gop can somehow subvert the voting process again to the point
where bush is named a winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it
again?
They did -- in 2000.
frank knows that
Does he? Really?
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows,
than many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches
for indirect methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn't want to
face.
Thank you,
you're welcome.
You have got to be the most disingenuous poster I've ever seen here,
James. Really.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:25:13 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:UvVhd.1712$sJ1.1522
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows,
than many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches
for indirect methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn't want to
face.
Thank you,
you're welcome.
You have got to be the most poster I've ever seen here,
James. Really.
and you, frank, are the most astucious. really
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:34:55 PM |
|
|
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:UvVhd.1712$sJ1.1522
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
yeah, but it is difficult for him becauwse if he accepts what he knows,
than many of his beliefs must logically be questioned. so he reaches
for indirect methods of avoiding facing the things he doesn't want to
face.
Thank you,
you're welcome.
You have got to be the most disingenuous poster I've ever seen here,
James. Really.
and you, frank, are the most astucious. really
Am I mendacious and specious, as well?
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 06:40:31 PM |
|
|
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in news:PIVhd.1713$ST1.1411
@news02.roc.ny:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
and you, frank, are the most astucious. really
Am I mendacious and specious, as well?
you are what you are.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 07:42:55 AM |
|
|
Some-Writer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it again?
They did -- in 2000.
I would disagree. What happened in 2000 was the system running it's
course. The only reason the SCOTUS even got involved was as a result of
the ruling concerning manual recounts only in counties selected by Gore
(an equal protection issue for the rest of the counties).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 11:41:18 AM |
|
|
In article <z9Mhd.1729$Y16.960@news01.roc.ny>,
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote:
Some-Writer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter
intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop
can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named
a
winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it again?
They did -- in 2000.
I would disagree. What happened in 2000 was the system running it's
course. The only reason the SCOTUS even got involved was as a result of
the ruling concerning manual recounts only in counties selected by Gore
(an equal protection issue for the rest of the counties).
Yeh, and how hypocritical that the Repugs are now stationing goons in
polling places that tend to have lots of Democrats.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Some-Writer" |
|
| Title: Re: supreme court rules.... |
02 Nov 2004 09:46:37 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:42:55 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
Some-Writer wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:24:24 GMT, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net>
wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:
the supreme court just ruled that the gop can have their voter intimidation
teams at the polls tomorrow.
if any of you think this is bad, just imagine what will happen if the gop can
somehow subvert the voting process again to the point where bush is named a
winner.
Wouldn't they need to do it a first time before being able to do it again?
They did -- in 2000.
I would disagree.
I know.
[...]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
