Man of the Year for what?
Chuck Ungar
man of the year. Don't you have to do something first? Half of the country
didn't even vote for the guy. I am sending out my Time cancellation request
tommorrow.
S. Jones
cun...@socal.rr.com says...
Well, didn't he set a record for executions or something?
--
------
By constantly repeating the lie "Bush won, then Bush won
the first recount, then Bush won the next recount", this
use of "public relations" technique is an electoral
application of the "Big Lie" strategy perfected by
Goebbels in Nazi Germany. (Supported by the Bush clan
during WWII).
No email please. This is the forum, not email. Email replies and cc's are
not requested, nor are they welcome.
Howard
out another $3.
John the Bull
that matter. I guess that's enough of an accomplishment.
He was the first president in U.S. history to be appointed by the US Supreme
Court. He's executed more people in his 6 year tenure than most states have
in a span of 20 years. I think he's accomplished a lot and is deserving of
the "AOL Time Warner, We want the merger to go through, award".
"Chuck Ungar" <cun...@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:CF6%5.35839$u85.3...@typhoon.we.rr.com...
Talk1370
more...if anyone doubted that the media are in the hands of radical
conservatives, that doubt has surely disappeared.
Bob Smith, afternoons WXXI-AM 1370, Rochester NY
XQoozeMe
president George Walker Bush. You lost pal.
XQoozeMe
God bless
George
Bush 2000 let the progress continue on all fronts.
>From: talk...@aol.com (Talk1370)
Furplay
balls during '02 and '04 all that much more satisfying.
OrionCA wrote:
>
> LOL!!!
>
> God, what whining losers Democrats are!
> --
> "For the office he won, and for the tough job ahead,
> George W. Bush is TIME's Person of the Year."
> - http://www.time.com/time/poy2000/index.html
--
"One Divided Nation, Under Bush. Intolerable. Without Liberty, And Just
Ass for All"
Sharyl Thompson
actions of the President select and his party.
Chuck Ungar <cun...@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:CF6%5.35839$u85.3...@typhoon.we.rr.com...
Lordy Lordy
your posts sound like the way kids talk in the eighth grade.
"Furplay" <mhi...@radiks.net> wrote in message
news:3A3D4C14...@radiks.net...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
XQoozeMe
many babies do you have SHARYL????
NO justic no peece right?
God bless
George
greg
of stuff about GW Bush and then, next to it, a human interest story in the
executioner in one of the Texan prisons. Clear propaganda from the NY Times. I
was wondering how they might have liked a front page with Gore talking about how
every vote must count, and next to it some pictures of partial birth abortions.
GD
Brocktoon
From: talk...@aol.com (Talk1370)
Date: 12/17/00 3:34 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <20001217153412...@ng-ft1.aol.com>
After this, at least we won't hear that silly "liberal media" shibboleth any
more...if anyone doubted that the media are in the hands of radical
conservatives, that doubt has surely disappeared.
>>>>>>
The Time person of the year is given ( according to their standards) to the
most influential person, negative or positive. They didn't give it to Hitler
to commend him and the same can be said of GW. Therefor, your point si
moot.
S. Jones
says...
> I saw the cover of the New York Times this morning, and it was a laugher. Lots
> of stuff about GW Bush and then, next to it, a human interest story in the
> executioner in one of the Texan prisons. Clear propaganda from the NY Times. I
> was wondering how they might have liked a front page with Gore talking about how
> every vote must count, and next to it some pictures of partial birth abortions.
Is there some connection, or are you reaching?
>
> "S. Jones" wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, didn't he set a record for executions or something?
>
>
--
------
GHouck
As insignificant as Time's Man of the Year is,
it certainly doesn't deserve a boycott for its
selection, especially since the selection has
little to do with the positive or negative
aspects of their choice, just that the person
was a major factor in something or other. They've
had several negative or unsavory selections, if
I remember correctly.
ghouck
ghost sniper
" S. Jones" <not-...@home.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.14a7748349c71fc89897bc@news...
> In article <3A3D93D3...@gregorybittar.com>, em...@gregorybittar.com
> says...
> > I saw the cover of the New York Times this morning, and it was a
laugher. Lots
> > of stuff about GW Bush and then, next to it, a human interest story in
the
> > executioner in one of the Texan prisons. Clear propaganda from the NY
Times. I
> > was wondering how they might have liked a front page with Gore talking
about how
> > every vote must count, and next to it some pictures of partial birth
abortions.
>
> Is there some connection, or are you reaching?
Are you saying YOU don't see the connection ?
No one can be THAT stupid.
Conquistidor
MC
John the Bull wrote:
> He was able to win the presidency without winning Florida or the nation for
> that matter. I guess that's enough of an accomplishment.
>
Matel makes a toy to teach the basics in arithmatic. Buy one.
>
> He was the first president in U.S. history to be appointed by the US Supreme
> Court.
Barely saved the country from a man (Gore) that filed, or participated in, 42
lawsuits regarding the campaign. He only won (temporarily) two cases, both in
the FSC. Gore lost in every other case from local election commisions to the
USSC. Maybe Algore should have stayed out of court. All Bush filings in any
court were defensive in structure.....and they won them all, eventually.
> He's executed more people in his 6 year tenure than most states have
> in a span of 20 years.
Governors don't execute anybody. Texas law only allows a 30 day stay....and he
did that to ensure compliance many times.
All Blues
something?>>
Yeah, for Convicted Murderers!
All Blues
with Gore talking about how
> every vote must count, and next to it some pictures of partial birth
abortions.
Is there some connection, or are you reaching?>>
In your world Convicted Murderers have more value than the unborn, eh?
All Blues
most states have in a span of 20 years.>>
More sympathy for Murderers than for Murdered Victims.
All Blues
shibboleth any more...if anyone doubted that the media are in the hands of
radical
conservatives, that doubt has surely disappeared.>>
Are you saying that you had an epiphany, Bob?
You are no longer a Raving Liberal?
All Blues
your
balls during '02 and '04 all that much more satisfying.>>
Bring it on Boxer Boy. As in Barbara Boxer.
All Blues
fascist
actions of the President select and his party.>>
Another vote for Murderers over the Unborn.
Paul Wesley Dunn
How about weathering a firestorm of deciet,lies,cheating and the usual
bag of Leftist tricks to become the 43rd President.
Spite-Envy-Class Warfare The Unholy Cry of Defeated Socialists
Paul Wesley Dunn
>if anyone doubted that the media are in the hands of radical
>conservatives, that doubt has surely disappeared.
It will disappear about the same time you go on weightwatchers fatass.
RossPilot
>most states have in a span of 20 years.>>
>
Here's another phrase Vic likes to use in response to anyone speaking out
against the revolving door execution chamber in backwoods, redneck, Texas.
It's an illogical diversion from the argument. . . . a red herring. Nobody has
said ONE word about sympathy for victims. In fact. One has NOTHING to do with
the other. Justice meted out like Judge Roy Bean does NOTHING for the victims.
It only creates more victims. By speaking out for fair trials, competant
defense attorneys (instead of drunks asleep thru trial, who never investigate
the cases) and then finally having appeals to the governor routinely denied
because he is TOO STUPID and LAZY to read the briefs . . . none of this
constitutes a lack of sympathy for the victims families. So GET OFF IT, Mr
Blues wannabee . . . and start arguing with something substantive.
Paul Wesley Dunn
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000 17:28:22 -0600, Furplay <mhi...@radiks.net>
wrote:
>Keep it up with the smugness routine, boy. It'll make kicking in your
>balls during '02 and '04 all that much more satisfying.
>
>
>OrionCA wrote:
>>
>> LOL!!!
>>
>> God, what whining losers Democrats are!
>> --
>> "For the office he won, and for the tough job ahead,
>> George W. Bush is TIME's Person of the Year."
>> - http://www.time.com/time/poy2000/index.html
Dave Lagergren
sense.
"Paul Wesley Dunn" <wpd...@ipa.net> wrote in message
news:ksmt3tgdtg00f8ve3...@4ax.com...
JD
> balls during '02 and '04 all that much more satisfying.
>
competent to win an election that all stats show that he should win.
He couldn't even meet minimal expectations, and it is time for the Dems
to find new, competent blood for pres (if they want to be competitive in
the future.) Gore is a has-been, and a very insincere person.
John
Cisco Kid
Shrub has now become only the 2nd President in US history to gain that office
without being elected either president or vice president (Gerald Ford was the
1st).
Before all the pubbies go ballistic, Gore won the national popular vote by
+540,000. He also was winning the electoral college until the USSC awarded FL
to Bush - "Sorry, we don't have time left to fix the problem."
Dubya - our president select.
David Lentz
Cisco Kid wrote:
>
> Time also chose the Ayotolla Kohmeni it its MOY award back in the '80s.
>
> Shrub has now become only the 2nd President in US history to gain that office
> without being elected either president or vice president (Gerald Ford was the
> 1st).
>
> Before all the pubbies go ballistic, Gore won the national popular vote by
> +540,000. He also was winning the electoral college until the USSC awarded FL
> to Bush - "Sorry, we don't have time left to fix the problem."
How was Al Gore "winning the electoral college?" Gore got a
certified two hundred sixty seven electoral votes. George W.
Bush won two hundred seventy one electoral votes. The fact is
that Bush won ever vote count in Florida and was going to win
any legitimate count.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
William Maslen
on him and gave him a 1 vote victory. Well it was 1 vote until one person cast a
blank ballot in protest of no representation for Washington DC or some such.
According to one article I read they are examining the ballots now and in Broward
County alone Gore had picked up 1500 and Bush 500 and Gore would have taken the lead
just with the one county.
Admit it, the election was stolen by the Republican majority on the Supreme Court
delaying recounts until too late and then the Republican dominated Florida
legislature was able to give Bush 25 votes and overturn the result of the rest of
the county.
Without Florida, Gore won the election hands down. Period. No argument. Fact. Only
Florida's 25 votes pulled it out by 1 vote for him.
If Gore had won this way you conservatives would be calling for the armed forces to
revolt and overthrow the gov't.
XQoozeMe
David Lentz
William Maslen wrote:
>
> Gore was ahead of Bush in the electoral college by 24 votes until Florida threw 25
> on him and gave him a 1 vote victory. Well it was 1 vote until one person cast a
> blank ballot in protest of no representation for Washington DC or some such.
>
> According to one article I read they are examining the ballots now and in Broward
> County alone Gore had picked up 1500 and Bush 500 and Gore would have taken the lead
> just with the one county.
>
> Admit it, the election was stolen by the Republican majority on the Supreme Court
> delaying recounts until too late and then the Republican dominated Florida
> legislature was able to give Bush 25 votes and overturn the result of the rest of
> the county.
>
> Without Florida, Gore won the election hands down. Period. No argument. Fact. Only
> Florida's 25 votes pulled it out by 1 vote for him.
>
> If Gore had won this way you conservatives would be calling for the armed forces to
You mean Broward County as in the home of the dimpled ballot.
The reason Al Gore picked so many votes in Broward County is they
she was counting dimpled ballots as if they were legitimate
votes. Any legitimate recount would have included Broward
County, which the Florida Supreme Court's recount did not, and
would reduced Gore's tally by counting out the dimpled ballots.
The only way Gore could win was by counting dimpled ballots and
no legitimate court was willing to call a dimpled ballot a
legitimate vote.
Consider this, at no time did Al Gore ever want, nor ask for, a
state wide recount with uniform standards. That alone ought to
tell you that Gore knew he has lost the election in Florida.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
Terrence Tyrka
exist in. There is no connection other than that invented by the GOP
spin-doctoring machine, which is on full power now that GW stole the
election.
--
turk
"ghost sniper" <10-...@dead-center.com> wrote in message
news:t3s5o3m...@corp.supernews.com...
vote
plenty of time to slam him. It's over now. Gore is history. Leave him alone already.
On the other hand, Bush is now our President-Select. He is fair game and will be for
the next four years. Or should he be called President-Reject?
William Maslen
they would just lose by even more than they thought they were losing by anyway.
Talk1370
>You are no longer a Raving Liberal?
>
No, only a confirmation of what I've known for many years...that the media are
driven by conservative bias.
Bob Smith, afternoons WXXI-AM 1370, Rochester NY
David Lentz
William Maslen wrote:
>
> Gore offered a state wide recount TWICE and the Republicans declined because they knew
> they would just lose by even more than they thought they were losing by anyway.
>
> David Lentz wrote:
Bollocks.
Al Gore, or any of his legal beagles, never asked any person or
institution authorized to conduct a state wide recount to
actually conduct one. A press release is not a request for a
recount. It is only public relations.
When asked if he wanted a state wide recount, David Boies, lead
beagle, said that such a recount would be illegal. Gore never
wanted a state wide recount, because he never believed he could
win such a count, as Gore has never won any vote count in
Florida.
David
--
qyra...@ebpurfgre.ee.pbz
Paul Wesley Dunn
>No, only a confirmation of what I've known for many years...that the media are
>driven by conservative bias.
just like your other delusions?, like we are a democracy or that you
are on a "real" station?
XQoozeMe
JD
"William Maslen" <wma...@qwest.net> wrote in message news:3A3FFEF7...@qwest.net...
> Gore offered a state wide recount TWICE and the Republicans declined because they knew
> they would just lose by even more than they thought they were losing by anyway.
>
Even if Gore and Bush BOTH wanted a legal recount, that won't necessarily make it happen.
By making a claim that Gore was somehow OFFERING a recount to Bush, the person who
is making the claim isn't being truthful. That offer is vacuous.
John
Mathew
On 17 Dec 2000, XQoozeMe wrote:
> Hahahahahahahahahaah GWB Too bad chucky!!!!!!!!!!!! I love the sound of
> president George Walker Bush. You lost pal.
You must be gay
William Maslen
first Repubs bash Gore for recounting "selected" counties and whine that he didn't want the
whole state recounted.
Then when it is pointed out that Gore was quite willing to have a state wide recount and said
so twice, then ....
they want to say he didn't have the authority to ask for a state wide recount.
So eithe way Gore is wrong, eh?
XQoozeMe
Cisco Kid
contested ballots would likely change the results of the election. That they did.
Shrubs team was quick to scream and shout, sending paid operatives to harass election
officials and mount a campaign of disinformation.
The democratic process in FL was short circuited by the GOP. The election was stolen and we
have an illegitimate dufus in the White House. I guess we shoud teach our children it is OK
to cheat as long as it gets you what you want. Don't worry about abusing alcohol, drugs or
violating your military oath - hell man, you can be president one day! (as long as you
execute enough people).
John S. Dyson
vote <one...@threefour.five> writes:
>
> Why don't you give Gore a rest. He's not running for anything right now and you had
> plenty of time to slam him. It's over now. Gore is history. Leave him alone already.
>
It will be Bush's charge to fix alot of the problems, and even if he does
help to fix some of the intitutionalized messes from the Clinton
administration, he will not get full credit for it.
I don't really 'love' GWB, but we had to choose him or lose. Gores'
inconsistancy was a serious distraction for alot of the people, just
like Bush's speaking difficulties are a distraction also. I'd rather
have someone who is almost intellectually honest like Bush, rather
than someone who is an almost smooth talker who is very well coached,
clearly not speaking what he really thinks, like Gore. For the REAL
Al Gore, take a look at the concession speech -- he would have won
if he would have consistantly been himself. We certainly don't need
someone who is president to be VERY UNCOMFORTABLE in presenting who he
really is in public. Gore is VERY UNCOMFORTABLE with who he really is.
It would be WONDERFUL if the GOP and Dems both would find better candidates
in the future. I'd happily voted for Colin Powell, whether he was Dem
or GOP -- even though he is too liberal for my taste. Dishonesty is much
more a distraction for the people and the press than minor policy
disagreements.
I suspect that the press prefers the 'scandal' approach to news gathering
for the reasons of competition with entertainment media. Both the GOP
and Dems are complicit in feeding the press and the people with candidates
who are really lousy people or really lousy candidates.
John
John S. Dyson
were screwed up, IMO, incompetently written. That doesn't excuse
Gores people trying to subvert federal law, state law and the
constitution by:
1) 'Petitioning' to change the rules after the election.
2) 'Petitioning' to have different votes be counted differently.
3) 'Petitioning' the Fla Supreme Ct to take constitutionally defined
power from the Fla legislature.
(I am using the term 'petitioning' in a general sense, with no specific
legal meaning.)
There have been rules violated on each side, and the best thing that
can be done is to negate the rule violations (e.g. the US Supreme
court nullifying the Fla Supreme court coup fixed a problem with the
Fla Supreme court), and try to work from within the system. If there
are problems, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT to fix the problems as soon as
possible. There was NO PRACTICAL WAY to fix the problems before 18Dec00.
Almost every 'on the fly' solution created MORE (not less) biases and
would have further corrupted the election. I don't think that anyone
is happy with this election, including GWB. There are individuals who
are committed to making GWB's victory hollow. Note that some of those
people seem to think that GWB feels like a Democrat, and he really
doesn't feel that way. He was likely already VERY UNHAPPY because of
the screwed up election.
The President is the president of all of the people, and the president
of everyone in both Nebraska and NYC!!! He is saddled with a very difficult
job, and in a situation that he probably didn't really want. GOP people
are not usually victory at all costs types, otherwise you'd see GOP people
trying to stay in office (or persuing an election) longer rather than
resigning when trouble happens.
You'll find that GOP people often resign or back-out of elections when it
is clearly in the best interests of the nation. It is likely that the
ONLY reason why Bush didn't concede was that there was NO count that
showed that he lost. I suspect that Gore was trying to take advantage
of this patriotic characteristic of Republicans by finding at least one
recount where Bush lost.
John
OldManWizard
had to be in on the fix. If you went to all the trouble to rig the
election, why didn't you play it all the way out?
David Lentz <Ro...@signfile.net> wrote in message
news:3A3FCDE8...@signfile.net...
Conquistidor
knew about was liberal bias.And for you to think otherwise is your usual session
of mental masturbation.
Cisco Kid
They only reason GW was able to survive FL was his own brother is gov and
promised him the state. The FL GOP launched a systematic effort to disqualify
thousands of voters who would likely vote democratic then went in and committed
"irregularities" by resurrecting tens of thousands of disqualified absentee
requests to further pump up their own numbers.
By hook and crook GW will be sworn in next month. His campaign was very
negative (that win at all costs scenario). I watched shrub last night comment
on some of his nominees. It looked and sounded as he were stoned again. It'll
be great for Leno and Letterman tho...
Letterman (12/20/00): "It appears the transition in Washington is proceding very
smoothly. Were successfully going from the pervert to the nitwit."
Boba Fett
Are you dopes gonna whine about this for 4 whole years?
JD
"Cisco Kid" <ck...@attnet.net> wrote in message news:3A4233D9...@attnet.net...
>
> Wholeheartedly disagree. Gore won the popular and electoral vote sans Florida.
>
easy to count), then Gore might win... That is kind of silly.
>
> They only reason GW was able to survive FL was his own brother is gov and
> promised him the state.
>
Promising the state from the Gov is vacuous. The Gov doesn't have enough authority
to force the legislature to do the right or wrong thing in this case. There is NO INDICATION
of illegal behavior from the GOP. There is certainly indication of extra-legal, unconstituional
behavior from the Dems though. Gore's own team was advocating the violation of federal
and state rules, and certainly helped to impede the federally legal votes from the military.
>
> The FL GOP launched a systematic effort to disqualify
> thousands of voters who would likely vote democratic then went in and committed
> "irregularities" by resurrecting tens of thousands of disqualified absentee
> requests to further pump up their own numbers.
>
The Dems overtly (without shame) attempted to keep military ballots from
being counted at all. Almost every ballot that Dems claimed that weren't
counted were really counted, alas they claim that imposible-to-properly-read
damaged ballots are valid, and of course, they aren't. If you take a look at who
impeded the most votes, so that they wouldn't be counted at all, you'll obviously
see that the Dems were the ones to do so.
The valid challenging of votes is important, especially considering the fact that
the voter lists are often larger than the eligible population. The attempts to
increase the registration have also increased the sloppiness of the system, thereby
making multiple voting more possible. The voter registration has to be improved
both from a quantity and quality standpoint, but usually sloppy and irresponsible
situations bode well for the Dems.
Of course, Daley is no stranger to illegal election politics anyway.
John
OldManWizard
2002. It will be so bad, even the Rupugnants will want to impeach him.
Boba Fett <bo...@starwars.com> wrote in message
news:3A42384B...@starwars.com...
<snip>
Paul Wesley Dunn
OldManWizard
without falling back in it.
Do rich folks have someone to do their defecating for them? Wow . . .
Paul Wesley Dunn <wpd...@ipa.net> wrote in message
news:e2d74t0pnc84llnls...@4ax.com...
Cisco Kid
"respect" the Republicans have given Clinton the last 8 years.
Cisco Kid
JD wrote:
> The Dems overtly (without shame) attempted to keep military ballots from
> being counted at all. Almost every ballot that Dems claimed that weren't
> counted were really counted, alas they claim that imposible-to-properly-read
> damaged ballots are valid, and of course, they aren't.
Gawd you people crack me up. How about, "Let's enforce the law, eh?" There was NO attempt by
Democrats to keep military (I assume you are referring to absentee ballots - not all of which are
strictly military) ballots from being counted. Because of the strict rules by which absentee
ballots are now scrutinized (again we're talking recent FL Republican enacted legislation) the local
canvassing boards cannot accept absentee ballots without certain items of proof. Read my lips,
"REPUBLICAN CANVASSING BOARDS REJECTED A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF OVERSEAS BALLOTS THAN DID DEMOCRATIC
BOARDS." They *had* to. It is the law. And since you all are touting the absolute authority of
the law and it hurts your supporters, you blame the Democrats.
I voted many years via absentee ballot when I was active duty CONUS. If I failed to follow
instructions, my ballot would likely be disqualified. You nutcakes make fun of little old ladies
from Palm Beach Co. not being able to follow voting instructions but rush to defend people who are
expected to follow instructions. Anyone see any double standards here? A kid now on active duty
deserves a break. A WWII veteran who happens to live in a democratic county does not. I call that
Bushit!
> If you take a look at who impeded the most votes, so that they wouldn't be counted at all, you'll
> obviously see that the Dems were the ones to do so.
Nothing obvious about what you said. In virtually every election, a heavy turnout favors the
democrats while a lower turnout favors republicans. There is no reason for Dems to impede the basic
right of casting a vote.
> The valid challenging of votes is important, especially considering the fact that
> the voter lists are often larger than the eligible population. The attempts to
> increase the registration have also increased the sloppiness of the system, thereby
> making multiple voting more possible. The voter registration has to be improved
> both from a quantity and quality standpoint, but usually sloppy and irresponsible
> situations bode well for the Dems.
How do you explain the thousands of largely minority voters who found they were suddenly no longer
registered? Katherine Harris's hiring of private companies to "cleanse" voter registration records
of "convicted felons" resulted in thousands of voters with not even a parking ticket getting
scrubbed from the rosters. No other state used this company due to the many problems know regarding
their results. This particular sloppy and irresponsible "process" helped Bush quite a bit, didn't
it? I'm sure you'll agree there will be a massive effort to level the playing field next time.
That's what I love about American politics - there is always a next time right around the corner.
See 'ya in 2002.
> Of course, Daley is no stranger to illegal election politics anyway.
I know about his father's techniques, what in particular has William done to get you concerned?
Paul Wesley Dunn
<OldMan...@HalfPastTen.net> wrote:
>Do rich folks have someone to do their defecating for them? Wow . . .
Class Envy is SOOO you ,loser
Blame someone else for your misery
John S. Dyson
"Cisco Kid" <ck...@attnet.net> wrote in message news:3A443249...@attnet.net...
>
>
> JD wrote:
>
> > The Dems overtly (without shame) attempted to keep military ballots from
> > being counted at all. Almost every ballot that Dems claimed that weren't
> > counted were really counted, alas they claim that imposible-to-properly-read
> > damaged ballots are valid, and of course, they aren't.
>
> Gawd you people crack me up. How about, "Let's enforce the law, eh?"
>
take precedence. I suspect that the most silly people are those who keep trying to recount
votes in regions of bias... It is clear that is where Gore and his team lost alot of their credibility,
even though that isn't necessarily the technical reason why their coup was aborted.
>
> There was NO attempt by
> Democrats to keep military (I assume you are referring to absentee ballots - not all of which are
> strictly military) ballots from being counted.
>
Actually, the rules that disallow the use of base premises for voting (Clinton Admin executive rules),
make it difficult to vote, forces using absentee ballots. So, a new class of absentee voters is created.
Clinton was trying to help his assistant, Algor.
Frankly, the most obscene violation that I have ever heard of in recent times is the incredible claim that BALLOT
DAMAGE BEING COUNTED AS VOTES!!! There is still no evidence that the ballot damage could credibly
be votes!!! :-). Ballots that had a defined transport mechanism with equivalent custody characteristics
to the USPS need to be counted, due to the lack of voter error. In fact, in many situations, there were
REQUIREMENTS that they didn't use the mail system, and to use the more highly secure non-postmarked
military mail system.
>
> Because of the strict rules by which absentee
> ballots are now scrutinized (again we're talking recent FL Republican enacted legislation) the local
> canvassing boards cannot accept absentee ballots without certain items of proof.
>
Note that no voter error was encountered, so that unless there is obvious fraud or a broken chain of
custody, then the vote must be counted, no matter the specious statute. It is quite possible for a state
law to be unconstitutional or against federal law. Of all of the mistakes, the previous Democrat legislature
left the voting and election laws in Fla in a terribly messy state. Hopefully, the situation will be fixed all
over the country.
In a similar way that the Fla Supreme court changing it's ruling after the election to be constitutional,
it is likely that the votes will now be correctly counted, since it is fair that they should be. Especially
when there is little probability of gain, the Democrats in power will sometimes make the right, moral,
ethical and legal decisions.
There is no evidence of tampering or ballot damage in the military ballots anyway. The kind of unfair
and specious hoops for our military to jump through are similar to the old 'land ownership' rules that
used to be used against others. The fact that those rules were held to be wrong, it is the same to
set up the (typically GOP) military people in a situation that they can not practically comply with.
If the damaged portion of a ballot is going to be read by 'divine guidance' (holding ballots up in the air :-)),
an obviously correctly executed ballot with minor technical violations out of the control of the voter should
also be counted. In fact, it is questionable if the policy of the US gov't being contravened by an obscure
requirement of the Fla law that the Fla requirement is valid anyway.
By trying to take advantage of a statute that the servicepeople weren't allowed to follow, then the Dems are
violating the servicepersons' voting rights. Hint: It wasn't the GOP election boards who were putting-off
the counting of the votes!!!
John
Dave A
> Gawd you people crack me up. How about, "Let's enforce the law, eh?"
There was NO attempt by
> Democrats to keep military (I assume you are referring to absentee
ballots - not all of which are
> strictly military) ballots from being counted. Because of the strict
rules by which absentee
> ballots are now scrutinized (again we're talking recent FL Republican
enacted legislation) the local
> canvassing boards cannot accept absentee ballots without certain items of
proof. Read my lips,
> "REPUBLICAN CANVASSING BOARDS REJECTED A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF OVERSEAS
BALLOTS THAN DID DEMOCRATIC
> BOARDS." They *had* to. It is the law. And since you all are touting
the absolute authority of
> the law and it hurts your supporters, you blame the Democrats.
Honestly, where have you been lately? They were disqualified because they
lacked a postmark. Not because of some error on the voter's part. And when
congress tried to revamp the way the military votes, Clinton said NO!
> I voted many years via absentee ballot when I was active duty CONUS. If I
failed to follow
> instructions, my ballot would likely be disqualified. You nutcakes make
fun of little old ladies
> from Palm Beach Co. not being able to follow voting instructions but rush
to defend people who are
> expected to follow instructions. Anyone see any double standards here? A
kid now on active duty
> deserves a break. A WWII veteran who happens to live in a democratic
county does not. I call that
> Bushit!
You are making a straw man argument.
> > If you take a look at who impeded the most votes, so that they wouldn't
be counted at all, you'll
> > obviously see that the Dems were the ones to do so.
>
> Nothing obvious about what you said. In virtually every election, a heavy
turnout favors the
> democrats while a lower turnout favors republicans. There is no reason
for Dems to impede the basic
> right of casting a vote.
Of course there is. Impede everyone who will vote republican. That is what
they did with absentee ballots. This isn't conspiracy theory, it fact that
has been on prime time news the entire election period.
Dave A
All Blues
same amount of "respect" the Republicans have given Clinton the last 8 years.>>
Just as soon as you Libs apologize for the 12 years of unbridled smearing of
Reagan and Bush, eh?
DishDude
>
> FL law says a candidate can request a manual hand recount in those counties where the
> contested ballots would likely change the results of the election. That they did.
>
> Shrubs team was quick to scream and shout, sending paid operatives to harass election
> officials and mount a campaign of disinformation.
Apparently not fast enough to stop Gore's bores from running down there
first, and getting entrenched for a 36 day battle. Not to mention that
Gore's legal lackeys spent more time with their mugs in front of a
camera over Bush's lawyers by a ratio of nearly 2-1. And at least
Dubbya didn't try to sell a plastic/phony "thee-iss eeizn't about who
wee-ins or lewzez, ee-its abowt awr dayemockruceeuh" bit of ca-ca like
Al Goron did every other day.
> The democratic process in FL was short circuited by the GOP. The election was stolen and we
> have an illegitimate dufus in the White House. I guess we shoud teach our children it is OK
> to cheat as long as it gets you what you want.
Actualy, that was the lesson I learned from Mr. Bill "I did not have
sexual relations with that woman" Clinton.
> Don't worry about abusing alcohol, drugs or
> violating your military oath - hell man, you can be president one day!
again, are we talking about Bush or Mr. Bill 'I did not inhale' Clinton
here?
--
"I am sorry I ever invented the Electoral College" -Al Gore.
Rick
Cisco Kid
Dave A wrote:
> Honestly, where have you been lately? They were disqualified because they
> lacked a postmark. Not because of some error on the voter's part. And when
> congress tried to revamp the way the military votes, Clinton said NO!
Nope. Most were disqualified for lack of a signature or a witness signature.
That, my friend, is voter error.
> You are making a straw man argument.
And the guy inheriting the White House next month is looking to the wizard for a
brain...
> Of course there is. Impede everyone who will vote republican. That is what
> they did with absentee ballots.
And what do you call "cleansing" the voter registration records in primarily
minority-rich areas?
XQoozeMe
george
"HAPPY KWANZAA >>> HI EASTER BUNNY"