Newsgroups: alt.politics, talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.obama, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: "Enraged Apostate, World Citizen" <Finding.Rea...@Every.Opportunity.invalid>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:04:41 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sun, Oct 28 2012 11:04 am
Subject: Re: 11 Days Till Obama Reelection
Neolibertarian <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote on Sun 28 Oct 2012 05:23:36p
> In article <XnsA0FA315F7627DFREOinva...@188.8.131.52>,Yes, it was. In question form, maybe. But it asserted a belief.
> "Enraged Apostate, World Citizen"
> <Finding.Rea...@Every.Opportunity.invalid> wrote:
>> Neolibertarian <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote on Sun 28 Oct 2012 04:48:45a
>> >> On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 12:48:55 -0500, Neolibertarian
>> >> >Who do you imagine took the Florida Election of 2000 to court? The
>> >> Yes.
>> >> The FLORIDA law that gave the RIGHT to a recount was done for proven
>> > The law gives the right for a recount. Statewide, of course.
>> > Why would anyone want a recount only in counties they'd already WON?
>> You really did not make that goddam dumb statement, did you????
> It wasn't a statement.
Gore actually put that in writing? The fact is, Gore was okay with a full
>> > Does that make any sense whatsoever?
>> Yes it does, because presidential candidates don't win the STATE---in
>> If Gore-Lieberman had obtained 1000 extra votes in "counties they had
> You misunderstood the question.
> The Bush counter-filings would have had no legs if Gore had called for a
> Gore didn't WANT a statewide recount.
recount because Gore differs in one way from Bush: he wants the goddam
truth and will be happy with it. In the end he was perfectly amenable to a
statewide recount, especially as the other campaign wanted it.
The fact is, Gore focused on those counties precisely because there were
"Partial truths" is what is said when there is a strong odor of dirty-
>> >> The problems have been proven.
>> > It's a can of worms to launch a lawsuit like that.
>> > Say what you want about Richard Nixon, but he was faced with the same
>> Recounts are automatic in such close margins. The only thing Nixon
>> Bush-Cheney tried to directly interfere with the process of recounting,
> Nixon knew that discovery of blatant voter fraud in places like Cook
> In time, it sullied the process of 1960, anyway. Partial truths about
dealing but not court-of-law-convicting proof of it.
Yeah, even a progressive like me believes there was dirt in the Daley
If Nixon had the goods on Daley to lock him away, despite the election being
It applies to elections and their initial counts and their recounts.
>> > Winning such suits, after your opponent was already declared the
>> Why does the NFL have reviews of plays?
>> Because it has been shown TIME AND AGAIN that first calls are WRONG
> Is that supposed to be an analogy? How does it apply to the
The Bush "machine" made the automatic assumption---because the initial count
Bush effectively called all the ballot counters "criminals" without having
And yet no reforms have been done to improve the voting technology used or
>> Who gives a God-damn that Bush's state campaign chief who is also the
>> You can be sure that after the disaster of the Bush-Cheney
> Yes, the can of worms is open.
ensure the voting integrity of the very places where the cans were opened!!!
Part of that voting integrity is to make sure those who have the RIGHT to
A concession is not a court filing, and it is arguable if it is even
>> > Once you're willing to litigate the outcome, no one wins. You lose.
>> You are right. Bush was the first to take it to court to stop the
> The first filings were Gore's, goofy. He'd already conceded. The
anything official. The state Secretary of State certifying the vote makes
The first lawsuit filed by EITHER the Bush or Gore campaigns as plaintiffs
Bush and several voters commence federal lawsuit
Feel free to check the Floria 2000 timeline.
> Forget the silly Republican-Democrat rubric for a minute.He doesn't "file for a recount" where that recount is automatic. What Gore
> You've been officially declared the winner of Florida. Your opponent has
> Then he retracts, and files for a recount,
protested about the recount was that it was done using absolutely fault-
ridden and bad technology, so repeating the process of using that technology
to count the ballots would achieve what?
It was well known that manual recounting was more likely to get to the true
> but not a regular recount ofNo, it was a MANUAL--"irregular"---recount of the counties with FAULTY
> the statewide election, but an irregular recount of three cherry-picked
balloting technologies, where unbelievable irregularities had occurred
(which is probably what you are thinking of). If the law allows for an
elections offical to do MANUAL recounts, then there is nothing "irregular"
In fact the FIRST LAWSUIT of Florida 2000 came from plaintiffs protesting
> What would YOU do at that point?You follow the law...you follow due process. A concession has no legal
force...that has been established.
Candidates will learn to wait for the official certification to be made
When a man proposes marriage to a woman, but one of them breaks it off, are
>> Of course the monster continues to feed itself. Right-wing filth likeAnd I am sure that Willard and his foreign policy team of John Bolton will
>> Dubyah, Dick, and Willard manage to keep the people dumb---no better
>> example than you----and then the dummies continue to vote and put these
>> people in power who continue programs to keep you uninformed and
>> > Thanks to Gore's blind ambitions and unbridled conceit, we all lost.
>> Did you know that the United Nations will be monitoring the United
> Heh. Yes, I knew that.
> Obviously, the lease of the UN headquarters building in New York should
see to that.
> Vacating the UN Charter may yet be out of the question, but there's noPerhaps you and others would like to urinate on Eleanor Roosevelt's grave
> reason not to establish a parallel multi-national strategic alliance.
while you at the task of ripping up the treaty that makes the U.S. a
signatory to the Charter?
A "parallel multi-national strategic alliance," huh? Something really along
> Perhaps what's called for is an alliance of free nations: US, UK, Japan,I am not sure a lot of those countries you name are totally sycophantic to
> Australia, Israel, Poland, Czech Republic, etc.
U.S. interests now, are you? Some of those countries actually dare to
question the correctness of U.S. judgments.
Right-wing talking points show a popular appeal in
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.