Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Breaking!: Massive voter fraud reported in Wisconsin election. Portent of things to come in November?
4 views
Skip to first unread message
anodial tow
Jun 9, 2012, 12:15:26 PM6/9/12
to
Moder@tor wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 21:53:55 -0700 (PDT), obadia...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, June 7, 2012 8:33:49 AM UTC-8, Moder@tor wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT), hal lillywhite<hlil...@juno.com>
>>
>>>
>>>> As I say, the integrity of our voting process is hugely important. We must guard it carefully (something that has not been done). That means investigating every reasonable possibility and doing all we can to keep those ineligible from voting while making sure those eligible can vote.
>>>
>>> Which also includes limiting the amount of untrue spin that both sides seem to
>>> spew. I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election day
>>> until all of the votes are in. It would virtually eliminate the media as a
>>> weapon.
>>
>> I'm gonna have to call BS on this one -- it isn't a "both sides" issue here. The Rs are the problem, plain and simple. They're trying to prevent Ds from voting, much like they did in the Jim Crow South (yes, I know the labels were different then, but it was the same people and we all know it).
>>
>> Curt
>
> I am not talking about political parties hindering people to vote. I am speaking
> about the media reporting of precincts and commentary that can influence voters.
> Would it be so bad to just delay the release of the election data until the
> complete count was in? The media won't stop talking about election during that
> time.
Let's remind even the committed hard core left what a hater of the US
Constitution you are:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Take a good long look at what it means to be an American, then ask
yourselves who and what this Moder@tor meme is...
May God help us all.
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 21:53:55 -0700 (PDT), obadia...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, June 7, 2012 8:33:49 AM UTC-8, Moder@tor wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT), hal lillywhite<hlil...@juno.com>
>>
>>>
>>>> As I say, the integrity of our voting process is hugely important. We must guard it carefully (something that has not been done). That means investigating every reasonable possibility and doing all we can to keep those ineligible from voting while making sure those eligible can vote.
>>>
>>> Which also includes limiting the amount of untrue spin that both sides seem to
>>> spew. I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election day
>>> until all of the votes are in. It would virtually eliminate the media as a
>>> weapon.
>>
>> I'm gonna have to call BS on this one -- it isn't a "both sides" issue here. The Rs are the problem, plain and simple. They're trying to prevent Ds from voting, much like they did in the Jim Crow South (yes, I know the labels were different then, but it was the same people and we all know it).
>>
>> Curt
>
> I am not talking about political parties hindering people to vote. I am speaking
> about the media reporting of precincts and commentary that can influence voters.
> Would it be so bad to just delay the release of the election data until the
> complete count was in? The media won't stop talking about election during that
> time.
Let's remind even the committed hard core left what a hater of the US
Constitution you are:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Take a good long look at what it means to be an American, then ask
yourselves who and what this Moder@tor meme is...
May God help us all.
anodial tow
Jun 9, 2012, 12:25:54 PM6/9/12
to
Sancho Panza wrote:
> On 6/9/2012 1:29 AM, Moder@tor wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:37:18 -0400, Sancho Panza<otter...@xhotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/8/2012 6:36 PM, anodial tow wrote:
>>>> Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>>>> The candidates and supporters are anxious to learn the results so I
>>>>>> suspect there would be a lot of opposition to such a measure.
>>>>>
>>>>> No doubt. Still, waiting 12 or even 24 hours is not going to seriously
>>>>> inconvenience anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Putting the victory parties and concession speeches off for a day
>>>>> is not
>>>>> a big deal.
>>>>
>>>> Well now, it looks like the proto-fascist Moder@tor has a fellow news
>>>> "suppression" partner who's equally willing to place a time-delay
>>>> button
>>>> on our Constitutional freedom of press.
>>>>
>>>> How interesting a pairing they make. One wonders how many others will
>>>> sign on to turn the water up to a rolling boil on the "frog" that our
>>>> Constitution has become...
>>>
>>> This group of posters has quite a history of disrespecting the
>>> Constitution and what surrounds it.
>>
>> FWIW, the government routinely delays the release of information to
>> the press
>> for different reasons. This would be no different. And you might
>> explain, Sancho
>> (and Spammy since I am only able to read his spew when someone is
>> stupid enough
>> to reply to him) how this is disrespecting the Constitution or how it is
>> proto-Fascist. Seems anyone who doesn't agree with your narrow vision
>> of the US
>> is labeled such. Pathetic.
>
> The only valid reason to delay releasing verified information has been
> when security and lives were in danger. A precaution that is apparently
> not in effect any more. Anything else usually falls into the category of
> crass political manipulation.
>
Let's revisit who and what he is again:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
The words of a traitor to our nation and a hater of our Constitution...
> On 6/9/2012 1:29 AM, Moder@tor wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:37:18 -0400, Sancho Panza<otter...@xhotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/8/2012 6:36 PM, anodial tow wrote:
>>>> Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>>>> The candidates and supporters are anxious to learn the results so I
>>>>>> suspect there would be a lot of opposition to such a measure.
>>>>>
>>>>> No doubt. Still, waiting 12 or even 24 hours is not going to seriously
>>>>> inconvenience anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Putting the victory parties and concession speeches off for a day
>>>>> is not
>>>>> a big deal.
>>>>
>>>> Well now, it looks like the proto-fascist Moder@tor has a fellow news
>>>> "suppression" partner who's equally willing to place a time-delay
>>>> button
>>>> on our Constitutional freedom of press.
>>>>
>>>> How interesting a pairing they make. One wonders how many others will
>>>> sign on to turn the water up to a rolling boil on the "frog" that our
>>>> Constitution has become...
>>>
>>> This group of posters has quite a history of disrespecting the
>>> Constitution and what surrounds it.
>>
>> FWIW, the government routinely delays the release of information to
>> the press
>> for different reasons. This would be no different. And you might
>> explain, Sancho
>> (and Spammy since I am only able to read his spew when someone is
>> stupid enough
>> to reply to him) how this is disrespecting the Constitution or how it is
>> proto-Fascist. Seems anyone who doesn't agree with your narrow vision
>> of the US
>> is labeled such. Pathetic.
>
> The only valid reason to delay releasing verified information has been
> when security and lives were in danger. A precaution that is apparently
> not in effect any more. Anything else usually falls into the category of
> crass political manipulation.
>
Let's revisit who and what he is again:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
anodial tow
Jun 9, 2012, 1:53:44 PM6/9/12
to
Moder@tor wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 08:12:50 -0700, "Baxter"<baxter.s...@baxcode.com>
> wrote:
>
>> -
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "Sancho Panza"<otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4fd36239$0$6070$607e...@cv.net...
>>> On 6/9/2012 1:13 AM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>> of federal elections.
>>>
>>> Which has what to do with censoring what is supposed to be the free press?
>>
>> Time delay is not censorship.
>>
> Sancho doesn't seem to be able to grasp the concept. No surprise. He isn't the
> brightest bulb in the lamp.
Well good grief,let's let that bright bulb of yours illumine us all and
our petty little CONSTITUTION:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
And that's merely one day's output from you, dear oh dear...
> He should Google 'media influence on elections' and
> see what a weapon it can be.
You should google up ; elections + fascism + suppression of the free press.
You might find names like Putin, Chavez, Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, and the
like tend to come up.
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 08:12:50 -0700, "Baxter"<baxter.s...@baxcode.com>
> wrote:
>
>> -
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "Sancho Panza"<otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4fd36239$0$6070$607e...@cv.net...
>>> On 6/9/2012 1:13 AM, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>> Sancho Panza wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/8/2012 6:36 PM, anodial tow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The candidates and supporters are anxious to learn the results so I
>>>>>>>> suspect there would be a lot of opposition to such a measure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No doubt. Still, waiting 12 or even 24 hours is not going to seriously
>>>>>>> inconvenience anyone.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Putting the victory parties and concession speeches off for a day is
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> a big deal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well now, it looks like the proto-fascist Moder@tor has a fellow news
>>>>>> "suppression" partner who's equally willing to place a time-delay
>>>>>> button
>>>>>> on our Constitutional freedom of press.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How interesting a pairing they make. One wonders how many others will
>>>>>> sign on to turn the water up to a rolling boil on the "frog" that our
>>>>>> Constitution has become...
>>>>
>>>>> This group of posters has quite a history of disrespecting the
>>>>> Constitution and what surrounds it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Article 1, section 4. Congress may regulate the time, place, and manner
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/8/2012 6:36 PM, anodial tow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill Shatzer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The candidates and supporters are anxious to learn the results so I
>>>>>>>> suspect there would be a lot of opposition to such a measure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No doubt. Still, waiting 12 or even 24 hours is not going to seriously
>>>>>>> inconvenience anyone.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Putting the victory parties and concession speeches off for a day is
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> a big deal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well now, it looks like the proto-fascist Moder@tor has a fellow news
>>>>>> "suppression" partner who's equally willing to place a time-delay
>>>>>> button
>>>>>> on our Constitutional freedom of press.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How interesting a pairing they make. One wonders how many others will
>>>>>> sign on to turn the water up to a rolling boil on the "frog" that our
>>>>>> Constitution has become...
>>>>
>>>>> This group of posters has quite a history of disrespecting the
>>>>> Constitution and what surrounds it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> of federal elections.
>>>
>>> Which has what to do with censoring what is supposed to be the free press?
>>
>> Time delay is not censorship.
>>
> Sancho doesn't seem to be able to grasp the concept. No surprise. He isn't the
> brightest bulb in the lamp.
Well good grief,let's let that bright bulb of yours illumine us all and
our petty little CONSTITUTION:
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"No one is forbidding the media of freedom of speech, just asking them
to surpress information for one day while the voting process happens."
"Only taking the temporary ban a step further."
"Unconstitutional to forbid election day coverage? How so?"
"I'm all for a media blackout on election data and stories on election
day..."
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
> He should Google 'media influence on elections' and
> see what a weapon it can be.
You should google up ; elections + fascism + suppression of the free press.
You might find names like Putin, Chavez, Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, and the
like tend to come up.
0 new messages