| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gactimus" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2005 09:27:17 AM |
| Object: |
Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
It looks like Spike Lee was right. Mr. Michael "Bowling for Columbine"
Moore's bodyguards do carry guns,
"Filmmaker Michael Moore's bodyguard was arrested for carrying an unlicensed
weapon in New York's JFK airport Wednesday night."
Well, well, well, could a man who believes that you don't have the "right to
bear arms" actually have a gun packing bodyguard protecting him? I guess as
far as Moore is concerned, there's one standard for all of us peons and
another standard for VILs (very important liberals) like himself.
Sure, Moore may think that "ordinary people" -- like YOU -- can't be trusted
to have a gun to defend your families. It's just too risky. Oh, but if
Michael Moore might be in danger, well that's a different matter all
together; he's special, you see, the rules that he wants to apply to the
"little people" shouldn't apply to him.
What a hypocrite.
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 02:40:40 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culgv1$85a$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cuk1f7$2sj$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
I'll take your changing of he subject as your admission that you
were
lying when you claimed Gore did not follow the law.
I accept your admission that Gore didn't follow the law by asserting
that
You're lying again, *****.
The subject, which you have snipped
out for the last 6 messages has been and continues to be 102.112 which
is
a
law Gore failed to comply with.
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
Prove that you're not a convicted serial rapist.
Attempt to change the subject is noted.
Your complete inability to support your claim is noted.
As is your ignoring and denial of a
statute that Gore did NOT comply with.
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
Candidates don't submit election returns, *****.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 02:48:40 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culpk7$hsu$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culgv1$85a$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cuk1f7$2sj$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
I'll take your changing of he subject as your admission that you
were
lying when you claimed Gore did not follow the law.
I accept your admission that Gore didn't follow the law by asserting
that
You're lying again, *****.
The subject, which you have snipped
out for the last 6 messages has been and continues to be 102.112
which
is
a
law Gore failed to comply with.
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore
failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
Prove that you're not a convicted serial rapist.
Attempt to change the subject is noted.
Your complete inability to support your claim is noted.
As is your ignoring and denial of a
statute that Gore did NOT comply with.
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
Candidates don't submit election returns, *****.
True, but they should comply with the requirement that such returns "shall
be ignored" when they aren't submitted on time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 08:09:14 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culpk7$hsu$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culgv1$85a$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cuk1f7$2sj$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
I'll take your changing of he subject as your admission that you
were
lying when you claimed Gore did not follow the law.
I accept your admission that Gore didn't follow the law by asserting
that
You're lying again, *****.
The subject, which you have snipped
out for the last 6 messages has been and continues to be 102.112
which
is
a
law Gore failed to comply with.
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore
failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
Prove that you're not a convicted serial rapist.
Attempt to change the subject is noted.
Your complete inability to support your claim is noted.
As is your ignoring and denial of a
statute that Gore did NOT comply with.
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
Candidates don't submit election returns, *****.
True,
Then you're obviously a liar for claiming that Gore failed to do so.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
13 Feb 2005 08:12:59 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cumcs9$1b8$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culpk7$hsu$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culgv1$85a$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cuk1f7$2sj$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
I'll take your changing of he subject as your admission that you
were
lying when you claimed Gore did not follow the law.
I accept your admission that Gore didn't follow the law by
asserting
that
You're lying again, *****.
The subject, which you have snipped
out for the last 6 messages has been and continues to be 102.112
which
is
a
law Gore failed to comply with.
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore
failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
Prove that you're not a convicted serial rapist.
Attempt to change the subject is noted.
Your complete inability to support your claim is noted.
As is your ignoring and denial of a
statute that Gore did NOT comply with.
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
Candidates don't submit election returns, *****.
True,
Then you're obviously a liar for claiming that Gore failed to do so.
I never claimed that Gore submitted election returns. That is YOUR lie.
What I am claiming however is that Gore ignored the law in the respect that
the returns from those 4 counties shall be ignored when they weren't
returned in time.
Or if you prefer you can claim that Gore complied with that section of the
law, in which case Gore lost by a large margin and you have no justification
to assert he had the most votes because those votes shall be ignored
according to the law.
Either way, Gore lost.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
13 Feb 2005 01:01:13 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cumcs9$1b8$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culpk7$hsu$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culgv1$85a$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cuk1f7$2sj$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
I'll take your changing of he subject as your admission that you
were
lying when you claimed Gore did not follow the law.
I accept your admission that Gore didn't follow the law by
asserting
that
You're lying again, *****.
The subject, which you have snipped
out for the last 6 messages has been and continues to be 102.112
which
is
a
law Gore failed to comply with.
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore
failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
Prove that you're not a convicted serial rapist.
Attempt to change the subject is noted.
Your complete inability to support your claim is noted.
As is your ignoring and denial of a
statute that Gore did NOT comply with.
Repeating your lies doesn't make them true.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
Candidates don't submit election returns, *****.
True,
Then you're obviously a liar for claiming that Gore failed to do so.
I never claimed that Gore submitted election returns.
Nor did I say you made such a claim, *****.
What I am claiming however is that Gore ignored the law
And you're still a liar.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 12:16:50 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
It's not the job of the cadidate to submit election returns, idiot.
It's the job of the county election officials.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 02:18:48 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culh6i$8d3$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
It's not the job of the cadidate to submit election returns, idiot.
It's the job of the county election officials.
Ah, then when they failed to certify those results within the time period
allotted because Gore kept asking for recounts then who's fault is it?
Further it's not a question of who is at fault for not getting the results
certified in time. It's a question of who didn't follow the law. According
to the law if those results weren't certified, then they "shall be ignored".
But Gore didn't ignore those results did he?
If he had then he would have had to admit at 5:01pm on the 11th day that he
had lost by a large margin in Florida and that there was absolutely no need
to continue counting those ballots.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 02:42:47 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culh6i$8d3$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
It's not the job of the cadidate to submit election returns, idiot.
It's the job of the county election officials.
Ah, then when they failed to certify those results within the time period
Prove that they did so.
allotted because Gore kept asking for recounts then who's fault is it?
Theirs.
Further it's not a question of who is at fault for not getting the results
certified in time.
You keep trying to claim it's Gore's fault. Obviously you realize
that you're caught in a lie and arenow trying to change your story.
It's a question of who didn't follow the law. According
to the law if those results weren't certified, then they "shall be ignored".
But Gore didn't ignore those results did he?
It's not his job to cerify results nor is it his job to ignore
results. That's the job of election officials and republicans who
don't want democracy to show that you're losers.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
12 Feb 2005 02:51:49 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culpo7$i4k$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:culh6i$8d3$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Stop lying, *****. YOu have failed utterly to show that Gore
failed
to follow ANY law.
Then explain how he complied with the following statute.
It's YOUR claim he didn't follow the law, *****.
Yep, and it's your claim he did.
It's not the job of the cadidate to submit election returns, idiot.
It's the job of the county election officials.
Ah, then when they failed to certify those results within the time period
Prove that they did so.
If they had the election would have been over and a certificate of election
could have been issued.
allotted because Gore kept asking for recounts then who's fault is it?
Theirs.
Right, they should have told Gore were to stick his calls for a recount.
Of course, that would mean that Gore lost the election, but you should be ok
with that.
Further it's not a question of who is at fault for not getting the results
certified in time.
You keep trying to claim it's Gore's fault. Obviously you realize
that you're caught in a lie and arenow trying to change your story.
No. I'm saying that when the returns weren't certified within the time
period, Gore should have complied with the law that such returns "shall be
ignored" and given up. He didn't, and indeed called for more recounts so
that among these returns that "shall be ignored" he might find additional
votes for him. Vote which according to the law had become meaningless
because they weren't certified in time.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "chrisv" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
07 Feb 2005 05:02:49 AM |
|
|
Scout 4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net, wrote in message
-Odndy-TbKQ2ZrfRVn-gA@adelphia.com:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu6sf4$6fk$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
Except that the law doesn't require a manual recount and
Gore never
established legitimate cause for calling for such a
recount.
Gore didn't need to ask your approval before asking for a
recount.
But he does need to follow the law.
And he did.
He did?
Prove otherwise.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the
Department of
State.--
That refers to submissions and not to recounts.
Did you "forget" to provide the support for your claim? Or shall I
take your failure to do so as an admisssion that you've been lying?
I'll take that as a "yes".
[...]
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the
Department of
THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RECOUNTS, YOU DUMBSHIT *****!
It certainly does.
You're lying again. It clearly refers to submitting election returns
and does not deal with the process of recounts.
It is a law with which Gore did not comply which is what is being
established. On the 11th day at 5pm Gore lost if he complied with the
law.
Oh, and that deadline does apply to recounts as well. That's what
"Returns must be filed by" means. Doesn't matter how you count them,
recount them, or how many times you count them. You have to file your
returns within the time period indicated or by law they "shall be
ignored".
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department
of State.--
(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the
county returns for the election of a federal or state officer with
the Department of State immediately after certification of the
election results.
(2) Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following a
primary election and by 5 p.m. on the 11th day following the general
election.
(3) If the returns are not received by the department by the time
specified, such returns shall be ignored and the results on file at
that time shall be certified by the department.
(4) If the returns are not received by the department due to an
emergency, as defined in s. 101.732, the Elections Canvassing
Commission shall determine the deadline by which the returns must be
received.
*plonk*
.
|
|
|
| User: "RD The Sandman" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
07 Feb 2005 12:11:53 PM |
|
|
chrisv wrote:
Scout 4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net, wrote in message
-Odndy-TbKQ2ZrfRVn-gA@adelphia.com:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu6sf4$6fk$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
Except that the law doesn't require a manual recount and
Gore never
established legitimate cause for calling for such a
recount.
Gore didn't need to ask your approval before asking for a
recount.
But he does need to follow the law.
And he did.
He did?
Prove otherwise.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the
Department of
State.--
That refers to submissions and not to recounts.
Did you "forget" to provide the support for your claim? Or shall I
take your failure to do so as an admisssion that you've been lying?
I'll take that as a "yes".
[...]
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the
Department of
THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RECOUNTS, YOU DUMBSHIT *****!
It certainly does.
You're lying again. It clearly refers to submitting election returns
and does not deal with the process of recounts.
It is a law with which Gore did not comply which is what is being
established. On the 11th day at 5pm Gore lost if he complied with the
law.
Oh, and that deadline does apply to recounts as well. That's what
"Returns must be filed by" means. Doesn't matter how you count them,
recount them, or how many times you count them. You have to file your
returns within the time period indicated or by law they "shall be
ignored".
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department
of State.--
(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the
county returns for the election of a federal or state officer with
the Department of State immediately after certification of the
election results.
(2) Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following a
primary election and by 5 p.m. on the 11th day following the general
election.
(3) If the returns are not received by the department by the time
specified, such returns shall be ignored and the results on file at
that time shall be certified by the department.
(4) If the returns are not received by the department due to an
emergency, as defined in s. 101.732, the Elections Canvassing
Commission shall determine the deadline by which the returns must be
received.
*plonk*
Your plonk bucket is filled to overflowing on just one name.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Graham" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
06 Feb 2005 07:16:28 AM |
|
|
Scout wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu38kb$ikt$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
By definition, and undervote was never counted.
You have no way of knowing WHY is wasn't counted
until you actually look at the ballot. That's why you
need a manual count.
Except that the law doesn't require a manual recount and Gore never
established legitimate cause for calling for such a recount.
Gore didn't need to ask your approval before asking for a recount.
But he does need to follow the law.
And he did.
He did?
Then you admit at the end of the 11th day at 5pm when those counties had not
registered their results the results of those counties which were 90%+ in
favor of Gore shall be ignored. Given the number of ballots rejected by the
law, then Gore lost by a considerable number.
Here is the law you assert that Gore followed.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
State.--
(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the county
returns for the election of a federal or state officer with the Department
of State immediately after certification of the election results.
(2) Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following a primary
election and by 5 p.m. on the 11th day following the general election.
(3) If the returns are not received by the department by the time
specified, such returns shall be ignored and the results on file at that
time shall be certified by the department.
(4) If the returns are not received by the department due to an emergency,
as defined in s. 101.732, the Elections Canvassing Commission shall
determine the deadline by which the returns must be received.
Raytard Fischer lies for sport. He has no awareness nor any care as to
what the law says....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
06 Feb 2005 07:26:23 AM |
|
|
"Graham" <dgfh@fggf.dsf> wrote in message news:420618AC.934F6E35@fggf.dsf...
Scout wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu38kb$ikt$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
By definition, and undervote was never counted.
You have no way of knowing WHY is wasn't counted
until you actually look at the ballot. That's why you
need a manual count.
Except that the law doesn't require a manual recount and Gore never
established legitimate cause for calling for such a recount.
Gore didn't need to ask your approval before asking for a recount.
But he does need to follow the law.
And he did.
He did?
Then you admit at the end of the 11th day at 5pm when those counties had
not
registered their results the results of those counties which were 90%+ in
favor of Gore shall be ignored. Given the number of ballots rejected by
the
law, then Gore lost by a considerable number.
Here is the law you assert that Gore followed.
102.112 Deadline for submission of county returns to the Department of
State.--
(1) The county canvassing board or a majority thereof shall file the
county
returns for the election of a federal or state officer with the
Department
of State immediately after certification of the election results.
(2) Returns must be filed by 5 p.m. on the 7th day following a primary
election and by 5 p.m. on the 11th day following the general election.
(3) If the returns are not received by the department by the time
specified, such returns shall be ignored and the results on file at that
time shall be certified by the department.
(4) If the returns are not received by the department due to an
emergency,
as defined in s. 101.732, the Elections Canvassing Commission shall
determine the deadline by which the returns must be received.
Raytard Fischer lies for sport. He has no awareness nor any care as to
what the law says....
Yep, then he snips out this reference to the law that he says Gore complied
with, then claims I'm lying about what he said. Here is the law. He asserts
that Gore complied with the law. If he complied then what I stated, "Then
you admit at the end of the 11th day at 5pm when those counties had not
registered their results the results of those counties which were 90%+ in
favor of Gore shall be ignored. Given the number of ballots rejected by the
law, then Gore lost by a considerable number." is true, and Gore lost. Ray
however doesn't like the law if it means his candidate lost.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GreyCloud" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
04 Feb 2005 10:58:07 PM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DLednQWeoKIpFp7fRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
By definition, and undervote was never counted.
You have no way of knowing WHY is wasn't counted
until you actually look at the ballot. That's why you
need a manual count.
Except that the law doesn't require a manual recount and Gore never
established legitimate cause for calling for such a recount.
Gore didn't need to ask your approval before asking for a recount.
Yeah, a hand recount is very precise... NOT!! Bunch of
crooks that got caught.
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
03 Feb 2005 08:17:45 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
No, wait, let me guess: You know it wasn't cast because it was for Gore.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
03 Feb 2005 09:54:02 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:ctum08$p18$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
04 Feb 2005 10:09:50 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
05 Feb 2005 04:17:31 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu1gud$6de$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
05 Feb 2005 01:58:33 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil or because the chad blocks the reader you insist that even
though they cast the vote, because the machine didn't read the vote
then they didn't actually cast a vote.
What a stupid liar you are.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
05 Feb 2005 08:00:05 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu38h8$ifo$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil
If they miss the bubble then it's a misvote and the only one to blame is the
voter.
or because the chad blocks the reader you insist that even
though they cast the vote
Except this didn't occur.
, because the machine didn't read the vote
then they didn't actually cast a vote.
No, that is a counting error. An undervote is a ballot in which not all
offices had a vote indicated.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
05 Feb 2005 11:59:31 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil
If they miss the bubble then it's a misvote and the only one to blame is the
voter.
Now you're lying about what you just wrote.
YOU claimed that they did not cast the vote.
or because the chad blocks the reader you insist that even
though they cast the vote
Except this didn't occur.
Because you're omniscient and you know everything that happens as a
card is run through a scanner.
, because the machine didn't read the vote
then they didn't actually cast a vote.
No, that is a counting error.
You can't even keep your own stories straight.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
06 Feb 2005 07:05:17 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu4bo3$mub$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were
votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil
If they miss the bubble then it's a misvote and the only one to blame is
the
voter.
Now you're lying about what you just wrote.
YOU claimed that they did not cast the vote.
They didn't. Failure to properly fill out the ballet renders your selection
null and void and hence they did not cast a vote. QED.
or because the chad blocks the reader you insist that even
though they cast the vote
Except this didn't occur.
Because you're omniscient and you know everything that happens as a
card is run through a scanner.
No, because you've not shown that it did occur, and I've seen no evidence
from anyone else that it had occured. I suppose I can assert that the vote
was inaccurate because little green men from Mars swapped out the ballots,
but that isn't going to mean anything unless I can establish it actually
took place.
, because the machine didn't read the vote
then they didn't actually cast a vote.
No, that is a counting error.
You can't even keep your own stories straight.
It's your story, not mine.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
06 Feb 2005 01:32:12 PM |
|
|
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were
votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil
If they miss the bubble then it's a misvote and the only one to blame is
the
voter.
Now you're lying about what you just wrote.
YOU claimed that they did not cast the vote.
They didn't. Failure to properly fill out the ballet renders your selection
null and void and hence they did not cast a vote. QED.
So casting a vote (incorrectly) means that you didn't cast a vote.
Got it.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
06 Feb 2005 03:28:50 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:cu5rbs$19p$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Scout <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote
They were recounted by machine
By definition, an "undervote" was never counted.
Yep, why count a vote that wasn't cast?
How do you know it wasn't cast?
It was an undervote. An undervote, by definition, means there were
votes
which were not cast.
Wrong, *****. It refers to a ballot where no vote was COUNTED.
No, an undervote ballet is by definition a ballet in which not all
votes
were cast.
So a person can CAST a vote, but because they miss the bubble with the
pencil
If they miss the bubble then it's a misvote and the only one to blame is
the
voter.
Now you're lying about what you just wrote.
YOU claimed that they did not cast the vote.
They didn't. Failure to properly fill out the ballet renders your
selection
null and void and hence they did not cast a vote. QED.
So casting a vote (incorrectly) means that you didn't cast a vote.
Got it.
Yep, if the ballot isn't done properly it is rejected. Those are the rules.
Oh, but that's right you have a problem with having to follow the rules.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: M | | | | | | | | | | | | |
