You're not worth getting the thread locked over.
Printable View
You're not worth getting the thread locked over.
I don't think that it's liberals who are trying to deny the separation of church and state in the first amendment. I've never heard the words "they haven't earned their rights" from anything but a right wing "patriot". Senator Bachmann's ideas are almost as loony as Palin's.
But perhaps you have some links to these big liberal lies? Something that can be cross-checked and shown to be constantly repeated and factually wrong? I have to confess that I haven't heard any whoppers from that side.
Haha, good one... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies...very-happy.gifQuote:
Originally posted by Cajun76:
As far as Stewart, his kind of destructive cynicism is exactly the sort of thing the country doesn't need if we're ever to make progress.
Oh wait you're serious? Hmm... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies...ndifferent.gif
Let's start with this one...Quote:
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I don't think that it's liberals who are trying to deny the separation of church and state in the first amendment. I've never heard the words "they haven't earned their rights" from anything but a right wing "patriot". Senator Bachmann's ideas are almost as loony as Palin's.
But perhaps you have some links to these big liberal lies? Something that can be cross-checked and shown to be constantly repeated and factually wrong? I have to confess that I haven't heard any whoppers from that side.
Bush Stole the Florida Election in 2000
Even when a liberal bastion like the New York Times paints itself into a corner and is forced to admit the awful truth a year after the fact, we still hear high elected officials from the Democratic Party making the claim 11 years later.
I got more...
cheers
horseback
horseback
I saw the vote recount and the hanging chad BS. Only one hole in the row was punched and it didn't completely cut the paper out so hey, let's throw out far more votes than the election was decided by.
Now here's the thing. It's EASY to f-up a die so that certain holes ALWAYS make hanging chads. Just **** the punch and bang a small nick in the die for the ones you want to make chads, not votes. EASY TO DO. And so direct, only the people who vote for the candidate chosen to chad will have their vote made null and void.
THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ANOTHER VOTE BUT WHO WAS IN CHARGE?
Not only that but in the 2000 and 2004 elections there were GOP lawyers who went to GOP judges and got 1,000's of votes discounted not on a case by case basis but whole DISTRICTS at a time. I know from listening to election day reports, the numbers were amazing -- far more than the margin of 'victory'.
And for 2004 there was a LOT of re-districting especially in Texas, all benefiting the GOP, all done by the GOP.
So I don't feel bad when people say that the election was stolen and I take it as some kind of confirmation at how fast so many people were denied process over having their VOTES taken away even those shown to be legitimate.
I don't expect different for 2012 except that now it will be so much cleaner with computers.
What I want is a RECEIPT for my vote with MY NAME, SSN, and CHOICES on it. I don't HAVE to show anyone but BY GOD I'd like to be able to get with others and have the proof to challenge the count results! I'm SICK UP TO HERE with the cheating.
Horseback, I read the link to the article you posted and I must admit I don't quite draw the same conclusions you do.
If I have read the piece correctly it seems to find that if the counties had been allowed to carry on the recount as ordered by the Florida courts, using the methods they intended then indeed Bush would have won. However, a recount using a more rigorous and no doubt time-consuming method, would have given the vote to Gore.
If you add in the other factors around the election which Gunz has alluded to then I just think it shows what a flawed process it was and how open to abuse it had become.
Btw, Not being a citizen of the United States I have no axe to grind here. Indeed, TV debates not withstanding, didn't Nixon have good grounds to claim the 1960 election was stolen by Joe Kennedys dollars?
This;
I find a not unreasonable idea.Quote:
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
What I want is a RECEIPT for my vote with MY NAME, SSN, and CHOICES on it. I don't HAVE to show anyone but BY GOD I'd like to be able to get with others and have the proof to challenge the count results! I'm SICK UP TO HERE with the cheating.
Stupid *** Liberals!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ2NjlINxT0
Arthur, I would point out that the NY Times is unabashedly on the Liberal Democrat side to the point of being a Mover & Shaker. Of course you would expect them to try to minimize the opposition's success. Wikipedia's account is a bit more even-handed, and covers the whole election controversy. I will remind everyone that Mr. Gore is probably the first US presidential candidate to ever renege on a concession; in my opinion, this puts him well below Richard Nixon in the class department becasue Nixon had FAR more cause to demand a recount in 1960 than Gore had in 2000.
I too remember the 2000 election and the legal contortions that went on; bear in mind that Gore only wanted a recount in four HEAVILY DEMOCRAT counties, absolutely NOT the whole state, and that the confusion on the ballots in those counties was due to local county (Democrat) elected officials who put them together,and the obviously politically inspired interference by the Florida Supreme Court, which was what prompted the US Supreme Court to act.
It is interesting that you cite the fact that ballots were thrown out in those counties over the proverbial 'hanging chad' but that you forget that the same Democrat officials who hosed up the ballots in the first place were the very ones who decided which ballots were valid (albeit with observers from both parties present). I sincerely doubt that their decisions favored votes for Bush.
I also remember that hundreds of absentee ballots for military personnel were purposely delayed by several states and counties under Democrat control precisely because they believed that most military personnel would vote Republican (in fact, Republicans are generally more likely to use absentee ballots than Democrats overall, never mind the military). I personally had three friends whose absentee ballots were delivered to them overseas AFTER the election, something that never happened to me during my overseas Navy days in the seventies, when everything went by an even slower and less efficient form of snail mail.
While we're at it, let's point out that the MSM were heavily weighted in favor of Gore, and that they attempted to 'call' Florida an hour before the polls in the western panhandle (which is in the Central Time Zone) closed, which led many voters to believe that the polls in their area were already closed. Let's not forget how the premature forecasting discouraged some voters in the western states to even bother to vote because their favorite Talking Head assured them that it was a done deal, which probably cost the Republicans a few House and Senate seats that year, which tied up the Senate after one RINO's defection in 2001.
You may recall that the rules were changed after that, because of the way the Mainstream Media 'accidentally' influenced the results (just coincidentally for their guys).
I live in San Diego, literally less than two miles from the border; I remember going into my polling place and causing all kinds of aggravation because I insisted on signing for my ballot in ink instead of the pencil they offered me. At the time, California did not require you to present your ID or any other proof of your identity or eligibility and there is no doubt in my mind that I spoiled at least one page full of votes intended to go for Gore in my mostly Latino district. I should point out that the police units who were shown on TV making sure that no illegal electioneering or voter intimidation was going on in the more --shall we say conservative?--districts were notably absent from my neighborhood, and the usual suspects were hard at work all around me (were I not a rather thick bodied male of a certain age, I probably would have received more attention).
I also remember the various Democrat 'action' groups who were intentionally registering Mexican Nationals who were in the country without proper documentation throughout California, promising them that if the Dems got into power, they would get all the goodies of citizenship without all the bother of actually following the rules and regulations that people whose countries don't share a border with the US have to follow...
The fact is that were were several other states where there were voting irregularities, and they almost all seemed to favor Democrat candidates, not just Gore.
Now on one thing, I am in total agreement with Gunz: you should have to present (in person) proof of your identity to vote at a polling place or obtain an absentee ballot, and that they should be able to confirm whether you voted (not how you voted) based on your Social Security Number.
I warn you though that you should be careful what you wish for: that particular requirement would in my opinion cost the Dems about 3 to 5 million Latino votes in California, Arizona, and Nevada alone.
cheers
horseback
Brought to you by the great taste of...Quote:
Originally posted by horseback:
Arthur, I would point out that the NY Times is unabashedly on the Liberal Democrat side to the point of being a Mover & Shaker. Of course you would expect them to try to minimize the opposition's success. Wikipedia's account is a bit more even-handed, and covers the whole election controversy. I will remind everyone that Mr. Gore is probably the first US presidential candidate to ever renege on a concession; in my opinion, this puts him well below Richard Nixon in the class department becasue Nixon had FAR more cause to demand a recount in 1960 than Gore had in 2000.
I too remember the 2000 election and the legal contortions that went on; bear in mind that Gore only wanted a recount in four HEAVILY DEMOCRAT counties, absolutely NOT the whole state, and that the confusion on the ballots in those counties was due to local county (Democrat) elected officials who put them together,and the obviously politically inspired interference by the Florida Supreme Court, which was what prompted the US Supreme Court to act.
It is interesting that you cite the fact that ballots were thrown out in those counties over the proverbial 'hanging chad' but that you forget that the same Democrat officials who hosed up the ballots in the first place were the very ones who decided which ballots were valid (albeit with observers from both parties present). I sincerely doubt that their decisions favored votes for Bush.
I also remember that hundreds of absentee ballots for military personnel were purposely delayed by several states and counties under Democrat control precisely because they believed that most military personnel would vote Republican (in fact, Republicans are generally more likely to use absentee ballots than Democrats overall, never mind the military). I personally had three friends whose absentee ballots were delivered to them overseas AFTER the election, something that never happened to me during my overseas Navy days in the seventies, when everything went by an even slower and less efficient form of snail mail.
While we're at it, let's point out that the MSM were heavily weighted in favor of Gore, and that they attempted to 'call' Florida an hour before the polls in the western panhandle (which is in the Central Time Zone) closed, which led many voters to believe that the polls in their area were already closed. Let's not forget how the premature forecasting discouraged some voters in the western states to even bother to vote because their favorite Talking Head assured them that it was a done deal, which probably cost the Republicans a few House and Senate seats that year, which tied up the Senate after one RINO's defection in 2001.
You may recall that the rules were changed after that, because of the way the Mainstream Media 'accidentally' influenced the results (just coincidentally for their guys).
I live in San Diego, literally less than two miles from the border; I remember going into my polling place and causing all kinds of aggravation because I insisted on signing for my ballot in ink instead of the pencil they offered me. At the time, California did not require you to present your ID or any other proof of your identity or eligibility and there is no doubt in my mind that I spoiled at least one page full of votes intended to go for Gore in my mostly Latino district. I should point out that the police units who were shown on TV making sure that no illegal electioneering or voter intimidation was going on in the more --shall we say conservative?--districts were notably absent from my neighborhood, and the usual suspects were hard at work all around me (were I not a rather thick bodied male of a certain age, I probably would have received more attention).
I also remember the various Democrat 'action' groups who were intentionally registering Mexican Nationals who were in the country without proper documentation throughout California, promising them that if the Dems got into power, they would get all the goodies of citizenship without all the bother of actually following the rules and regulations that people whose countries don't share a border with the US have to follow...
The fact is that were were several other states where there were voting irregularities, and they almost all seemed to favor Democrat candidates, not just Gore.
Now on one thing, I am in total agreement with Gunz: you should have to present (in person) proof of your identity to vote at a polling place or obtain an absentee ballot, and that they should be able to confirm whether you voted (not how you voted) based on your Social Security Number.
I warn you though that you should be careful what you wish for: that particular requirement would in my opinion cost the Dems about 3 to 5 million Latino votes in California, Arizona, and Nevada alone.
cheers
horseback
http://theislamicstandard.files.word..._news_logo.jpg
I have never been able to vote without showing who I am to match the rolls.