June 23, 2005
Democratic Deception Defeated by its own conclusions
All I know is what I read in the newspapers and I tend to read the liberal Washington Post. There is an interesting article today that must be read very carefully to avoid the spin. Take out your yellow underliner pens and watch the deception machine try to do its work.
The headline states ominously, "Democrats Say 2004 Election System Failed in Ohio." Many people just read the headline and may not get to the part where it says, "Party Concedes No Evidence of Fraud;"
So if there is nothing there, what is the article about?
The DNC evidently formed a task force to look for problems and fraud. Depite all their efforts, they still have only inuendo and tales of woe. Just like Florida in 2000, this does not mean they will give up, but I have to say that the non-politicos are honest when pressed.
One of the task force members, a professor from Cornell named Walter Mebane conceded that there was no "support whatsoever for the claim that there was a large-scale misallocation of vote from [Democratic nominee John F.] Kerry to [President] Bush in Ohio" and said it is highly unlikely Kerry would have won the state in any case." This is the guy from the Democratic side.
By the end of the article we find that the number of provisional ballots was about the same in 2004 as 2000 and Ohio counted a much greater percentage of them than other close states such as Pennsylvania or Florida. African American turnout reached record levels, up by 84,000 since 2000.
In other words, what the Dems have found in Ohio is a better than average election process. You think they would be embarrassed, but no. Howard the howler has taken the line that just because he can't find any reason to believe there was a problem, there must have been one. It is good this guy no longer practices medicine. Imagine all the surgery he would be doing on healthy people just because his tests couldn't find any maladies.
I have to credit the Post in that it did present the facts, even if you have to look for them. The headline was unfortunate, because many people don't get beyond the headline. The NYT was actually better. They wrote, "In Ohio Vote, Woes, Yes, Fraud, No"
So it is finished. Kerry lost in Ohio and even his supporters agree, at least those who think clearly. I wish the Dems would stop trying to make up stories. It hurts the confidence people have in their democracy and does nobody any good in the long run. Democratic leaders mention lack of confidence in the electoral process. Yes. But they are the ones who create it with their disinformation.
The headline might have been, "Ohio vote remarkably fair despite challenges."
Posted by Jack at June 23, 2005 08:46 AMHere’s another example of the deception in the media.
Last night on MSNBC the anchor stated: “The increasing violence in Afganistan has resulted in another american soldier being killed”
What are your impressions of what she might have been talking about?
The actual story is a pilot who was flying a noncombat U2 spy plane accidentally crash while attempting a landing and was killed during the accident.
Scroll back up and again read how the anchor hyped the story before the break.
This happens 1000’s of times per day.
Posted by: James at June 23, 2005 09:17 AMJust one more loose end Jack: do you know what happened with the guy in Fla who said he was paid by a Republican to rig the black boxes? I never caught the end of that story either….
I’m sure Conyers knows.
Posted by: George in SC at June 23, 2005 09:19 AMInstead of trying to find a “problem” in the ballot system, the Dems should be concerned about why the People didn’t vote for them.
Posted by: Kevin at June 23, 2005 09:28 AMGeorge,
Maybe there was a reason you never heard anything more on that story, like possibly the validity of it?
Kevin,
So true. It’s not even funny anymore when I hear Democrats say; “we failed to get our messege out”
Truth being, when you own ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and you believe that the reason people didn’t vote for your ideas, is because they were unable to hear your ideas, you are a dumba$$, and who would want to vote for you to be in charge of anything?
Posted by: James at June 23, 2005 09:35 AMJack, you Republicans are paranoid about election fraud. The article talks about “numerous problems”, including “long lines were caused by the scarcity of voting machines in a number of precincts, particularly in minority areas” and a “clear lack of confidence in the system among African Americans” because of “gross administrative failure”. In short, the article says that the elections were screwed up. That’s the news.
The byline is that there’s no evidence of fraud - just evidence of incompetence. So we can still give Bush the presidency, and give Blackwell, the Republican Sec of State in Ohio, the benefit of the doubt: he’s still just an “administrative failure”, not a crook.
Thanks for pointing it out, Jack. Is this what passes for good news lately for Team Red?
Posted by: William Cohen at June 23, 2005 09:38 AMOh I found it. Looks like this one is still going strong. He passed his lie detector test funded by an unknown source….
Posted by: George in SC at June 23, 2005 09:46 AMfrom what i have seen (especially of the liberal side of this blog) is a lust for bllod and revenge for bill clintons inpeachment.
with only wild thoughts and spin they have labeled “bushco” a “liar” and convicted him of such and assured themselves he will be impeached.
they are spending all there time and effort on this, making it hard for them to win elections.
they are also desperte to make the us look bad any chance they get to the world. the attempts to turn the public mood into a vietnam look is scary.
i guess the dems think destroying bush by burning down everything america stands for is in their best interest.
its a sad time in the country when the oppistion is lead buy the certifible loonie in dean, even worse is that the dems are proud of it.
Posted by: t c at June 23, 2005 09:49 AMJack,
Did the Washington Compost happen to mention Anything about the real and proven fraud in wash. state gov.’s race ?
Posted by: Beagle at June 23, 2005 09:57 AMWilliam, I agree with your take on these stories.
It’s a shame that DNC chairman Howard Dean isn’t getting the same message. :(
“While we certainly couldn’t draw a proven conclusion that this was willful, it certainly has the appearance of impropriety,” Dean said.
In other words, ‘We can’t prove it, but we know they did it…’
Posted by: Rhinehold at June 23, 2005 10:10 AMRhinehold-
That was his softened statement! He first said:
“It’s been widely reported over the past several years that Republicans do target African-Americans for voter suppression. It’s very clear here while there was no massive voter fraud, and I concur with the conclusion — it’s also clear that there was massive voter suppression,” Dean said.
Posted by: George in SC at June 23, 2005 10:16 AMThe problems brought up in this article need to be addressed, whether it would change the outcome of the election or not. We claim to be the model for democracy, but we can’t even guarantee the right to vote!
This shouldn’t be a Democrat vs. Republican issue. This should be an American issue.
Posted by: Rob Cottrell at June 23, 2005 10:31 AMHere’s a little glimpse of what I saw at the voting booths this last election:
I woke up that morning gathered up my voters registation card, I.D, proof of residency etc. and headed out to the polls!
I lived in a college town and it was packed…the people conducting the polls were very professional and and eager to help!
In front of me was a group of college students(mostly black) when it was their turn, the person asked their names and then searched through the logs to find them. When they could not they asked them if they were registered in that county, and it turned out that no they were actually residents of St. Louis. The people explained to them that they had to vote where they are registered, or they needed to request an absentee vote.
Standard practice, basic knowledge! This set these kids off and they left in a huff! When I finished voting I left the building to find this same group outside yelling that they were not allowed to vote(and also making references that they thought it was because they were black)!
This of coarse was not the case, but to the passerbyer I’m quite sure some believed it to be true!
Sad,so sad! I’m sorry that some people simply don’t know how to vote but that is no one elses fault but their own. As with anything else if your not sure, the time to receive the education is before the main event!
While all these celebrities were running around filling up clip boards w/ names, they would have been more productive running “mock” elections teaching people the process!
Posted by: Traci at June 23, 2005 10:41 AMYes, I have noticed what went on here. It’s the 2000 mantra…”They stole the election…but we can’t prove it”. Also the race mantra, “Republicans don’t want African-Americans to vote!”
In the words of Howard Dean….
“It’s been widely reported over the past several years that Republicans do target African-Americans for voter suppression. It’s very clear here while there was no massive voter fraud, and I concur with the conclusion — (emphasis mine)
it’s also clear that there was massive voter suppression.”
However one scholar involved in the study quickly backed away from that notion.
“Where the partisan bias came from, where it went, we really have no basis for making any assertion about that and I don’t believe the report makes any statements about that,” said Cornell University professor of government Walter Mebane Jr.
So who do we believe? Do we believe Howard “The Mouth” Dean…or do we not? Do we believe that there was a “vast right-wing conspiracy” in Ohio or not?
Aldous wrote on this blog the other day that Osama Bin Laden was the Republican’s best asset for the elections (I am assuming the 2006 and 2008 elections).
I have to disagree.
I think Howard Dean is the Republican’s best asset. I think every time he opens his mouth, Republicans get another couple thousand votes. IMO…I think Dean is to the Republican as Newt was to the Democrats a decade ago.
Would you run a tax projection on the following?
Bob Moore, Phone 580-351-2531, Fax 270-964-1831, Webpage http://www.logicalfinancing.gobot.com
Webpage http://www.geocities.com/oklahomataxpayer
Email oklahomataxpayer@yahoo.com
Reform Social Security and Eliminate Federal Personal Income Tax
First item is federal income tax on interest earned on bank accounts. Why have income tax laws for 300 million people when the federal government should have the financial institutions (appr. 10,000) pay a monthly tax being a percentage of the total dollars paid as interest to clients. No tax due from the citizens, the bank pays the tax, SIMPLE.
Same is true with stock dividends, have the corporations pay the government a percentage of the dollar amount paid to the stockholders. No tax due from the citizens, the corporations pay the tax, SIMPLE. 10% is a good rate.
Second item is a 40-40 Tax on Gasoline:
(a) eliminate the .9 cent;
(b) this tax shall not be amended for forty (40) years;
(c) a total tax of forty (40) cents a gallon tax according to the following:
(d) twenty (20) cents shall go to the federal government and
(e) twenty (20) cents shall go to the originating State government
(f) gasoline tax to ONLY go toward roads and bridges.
Third item is Truthful Tax Reform——- Federal Tax Payroll Program.
1. “TOTALLY” Eliminate the Personal Income Tax “TOTALLY”.
2. Fact: FICA tax is over 15% of the employees’ paycheck. Federal Courts have ruled the FICA is a tax not a retirement fund. The Federal Government needs to be honest and declare that FICA tax goes to the general fund to pay for government spending programs. Re-name FICA tax to Federal Tax Payroll Program.
3. Government taxes should be on commission, just like all private businesses and private business’ employees. The government spending can only grow if more people make more money.
4. Payroll deduction is the most efficient way to collect taxes. The Federal Tax Payroll Program will be the only federal tax that wage-earning Americans will pay. Never a personal income tax form to file with the IRS.
5. Keep the system simple, one rate for all taxpayers. Ten (10%) Percent is good enough for GOD, then Ten (10%) Percent should be good enough for the government. However the federal government is not as efficient as GOD so lets put the maximum rate at twenty (20%) percent.
6. The Federal Tax Payroll Program shall be 20% “Maximum” of which Ten (10%) Percent to be withheld from the wage-earners’ pay to be matched by Ten (10%) Percent from the Employer. Rate shall not be raised ever.
7. Earmark how the money shall be allocated, such as:
(a) 1% to DOD for National Defense;
(b) 4% to Citizens Retirement Fund, a 401K type program——private social security fund for each person;
(c) 15% to Social Security and other spending programs.
A total of 20% of the wage-earners’ salary to go to the Federal government.
This type of system would result in no forms, no worry and a much smaller I.R.S. No tax forms to file each year. No tax credits to be given or taken away by the Federal government. No increase or decrease in the tax rate.
This would get the Federal Government out of micro-managing the daily life of the taxpayers. It is called FREEDOM!
Social Security; at this point, the government should just pay everyone the same amount each month once the person has reached age 62 or 65. We are a rich Country and we do not want our Senior Citizens living below the poverty level so just increase the monthly check for all senior citizens. If Congress was really serious about eliminate the national debt, Congress would cut the spending program.
An advantage given by the government to one person means an unfair dis-advantage to all other Americans. Our Founding Fathers believed that small government and less taxes means more freedom.
The Oklahoma Taxpayer, Editorial by Bob Moore
Bob Moore, P.O. Box 1683, Lawton, OK 73502; Phone 580-351-2531 Fax 270-964-1831 Web Page http://www.geocities.com/oklahomataxpayer Email: oklahomataxpayer@yahoo.com
To James
You state that thousands of stories are over hyped by the liberal news. You have mentioned one. Vote fraud,Haliburton investigation, Bush’s service records(Remember the document was not authentic but the info in it was)The Ohio coin scandal,Tom Delay,Cheney’s ex company doing business in Iran despite U.S. sanctions (They found a loophole(Why is it that the biggest ^$$holes find the best loopholes),secret British memos proving Bush lied to get us to attack Iraq.
Here are 7 that were under hyped. Notice the accuracy of my count.
You put out these partisan shock-bombs just like alot of others who call themselves conservatives. This posting was aimed at getting the attention of the simple minded sheep who support this corrupt administration and take the focus off of the fact that it lacked any substance or facts to support it.
par for the course. If you want to polish your skills at cheesy shock-bombs not based on fact, watch or listen to Rush Libaugh.
Andre
I don’t suppose you knew you were making a joke, but you did with the “Bush’s service records(Remember the document was not authentic but the info in it was”
This is the complaint I have against many in liberal media. The info in the document was not authentic. There was no evidence there. That was the point. That is the same thing we are paraphrasing to ridicule Howard Dean when he says something like the evidence doesn’t prove it, so it is true.
Since your standard of proof does not exceed the inuendo level, I hope you don’t take your own advice on important decisions.
Posted by: Jack at June 23, 2005 11:12 AMO.K. Andre
As long as you go back to the always so accurate Moveon.org and the bought and paid for rants of most of the media.
I think there is an organization you would be interested in, I saw it first in the movie “Team America World Police” It’s the ” Film Actors Guild” (I think they go by some sort of acronym)
Andre,
“This posting was aimed at getting the attention of the simple minded sheep”
Did you pick the correct column to post it ?
Posted by: Beagle at June 23, 2005 11:23 AMAndre,
After you posted that crap “Bush Administration coincidences” and tried to pass it off as truth, you are forever labelled as the idiotic bomb thrower who has no concern, what so ever, for accuracy or truth.
I guess it is ok for you to throw stones, most of the windows in your glass house are already broken.
Posted by: James at June 23, 2005 11:32 AMThis have irritated me for years, how Dems can just say things without any credibility. I know Gitmo has been overly talked about, but it’s another situation with no evidence.
And what makes me even more angry is the fact that our Republican representatives don’t have the backbone to call them out on it. Trent Lott apologizes and all hell is raised, Dick Durbin apologizes and all is forgiven. It’s a constant double standard.
Posted by: Tony at June 23, 2005 11:39 AMJack-
Provisional ballots are what people use when there are that prevent them from being able to confirm their registration at the polling place. It’s not the sign of a healthy system.
Pardon me:
Provisional ballots are what people use when there are problems that prevent them from being able to confirm their registration at the polling place.
Bob,
What does your verbage have to do with the topic? Get with it, did you post to the wrong Blog or are you fishing?
Posted by: Cliff at June 23, 2005 11:57 AMJack writes:
“So if there is nothing there, what is the article about” (I wish I knew how to indent other folks words with the line on the left)
Is it not possible there could be election problems without outright fraud? If the Md governor put one voting machine in Montgomery County and 1000 in PG county wouldn’t that be at least worth a newspaper article? Hypothetically speaking?
According to you - the answer is no. The media must prove the ballot boxes are stuffed or shut up.
And this is your showcase example of liberal media bias. It is far easier to find disinformation in some more conservative outlets.
Posted by: Tom G at June 23, 2005 12:01 PMNice spin Jack,
But I’ve got a news flash for you — voter fraud can’t be proven when machines don’t have a paper trail, and when all the machines weren’t impounded and examined.
As for the report this is what was found:
An exhaustive five- month investigative study of the troubled presidential election of 2004 in Ohio has concluded that the state’s voters encountered widespread system failure, with more than a quarter of voters — and 52 percent of African Americans — reporting significant problems at the polls.According to the report, which was presented to DNC Chairman Howard Dean at a news conference today, the systemic problems plaguing Ohio’s voting process included: significant evidence of voter suppression, negligent and poorly trained election officials, long lines, problems with registration status, polling locations, absentee ballots and provisional ballots and unlawful identification requirements at the polls.
Rather than challenge or question the results of the election, the report establishes a factual basis for developing a comprehensive agenda of reforms needed to ensure that every eligible voter has the opportunity to vote and to have that vote counted.
“Democracy only works when citizens believe election outcomes actually reflect their choices,” said Donna Brazile, chair of the Voting Rights Institute and the project’s leader. “Our goal was not to question the election result, but to determine whether or not every eligible voter in Ohio who sought to vote was able to cast a ballot and have it properly counted. The data clearly indicates that the system failed far too many Ohio voters.”
Also, do me a favor, could you? Please take a few minutes to read this article by Christopher Hitchens that appeared in Vanity fair in March — he’s no conspiracy theorist, and he’s not too fond of Democrats either:
Ohio’s Odd Numbers
Thanks.
(I wish I knew how to indent other folks words with the line on the left)
Above the comment box, there’s a hint how to do that and a couple other text tricks. For indent quoted text in a block, do this: <blockquote>quote text</blockquote>
Posted by: LawnBoy at June 23, 2005 12:12 PMAll the comments, but there is a bottom line. We have no reason to believe the election in Ohio was conducted in a way that caused the “wrong” guy to win. We can’t find evidence of fraud or intimidation. We can find some mistakes and some foolish behavior, just like we always find.
The people of Ohio prefered George Bush, but a significant margin. That is what we have found and even the Democrats own study can’t find anything else.
Posted by: Jack at June 23, 2005 12:36 PMAs usual Jack, all you’re saying is: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. And the wall of denial grows higher… (heavy sigh)
Matty said,
Anthony, Anthony, Anthony… . Listen to yourself. What the F**K are you writing about? Spining is the pure nature of both parties. The democrats spin, and so as the republicans. I agree with you 100%. Bush won Ohio fair and square. The only disagreement I have with you is… Americans are stupid enough to elect a fool to be their president. Then, so be it.
The world according to Matty
I am not knowledgeable about the voting machines in Ohio, but here in AZ the ballot is fed into a reader that records the information that the voter registration agency has, which is the same info that is on the table when you come to vote. It is recorded in the machine and then read into the voter registration agency’s record. The paper trail would be nice, but usually not necessary. If the Ohio machines are like the AZ machines then, there is no beef. Paper trail is a paper lion.
Posted by: tom at June 23, 2005 01:26 PMAdrienne
Maybe I don’t see it because it is not there.
“Yesterday upon the stair / I met a man who wasn’t there. / He wasn’t there again today / I wish that man would go away.”
Dems should remember the poems they learned as children, but also recall that sometimes if you believe hard enough, it still isn’t true.
Posted by: jack at June 23, 2005 01:34 PMAfter a massive ‘get out the vote’ campaign it was impossible to tell who would actually show up to vote and where.
Not being able to predict the future does not make those in charge of the ballots guilty of any form of voter discrimination or fraud.
Beagle wrote
Did the Washington Compost happen to mention Anything about the real and proven fraud in wash. state gov.’s race ?
I don’t know why you have so much “rage” and “hate” over an election that happened months ago. “Get over it.” “Move on.” Don’t be a “sore loser”. You searing “hatred” for Democrats only “provides aid and comfort for our enemies”.
I don’t know if you feel better, but I do. Hahaha. :)
Posted by: Political Therapist at June 23, 2005 02:03 PMJack,
It is funny how often you guys accuse the press of “bias” when they are doing exactly what they are supposed to do: give you the facts, not tell you what to think about them. Look at their headline again. It states an objective fact. USING INFO IN THE ARTICLE, you decided that the Democrats’ complaint wasn’t valid.
In contrast, the headline you suggested is a subjective judgement about the election. It would a bad headline for a news article.
Posted by: Woody at June 23, 2005 02:22 PMThank God the feds have not yet fully investigated voter fraud in Wisconsin.
http://www.jsonline.com/search/results.asp?searchtype=jso&Keywords=VOTER+FRAUD
Check this link. Voter fraud is rampant in Milwaukee, including all the dirty tricks in the book. In the 2000 prez election, a group of IL dems were busted taking homeless people to the polls without registration to get them to vote for Gore. They bribed them with cigarettes, hence, the “Smokes for Votes” scandal. In the 2004 prez election, the son of the local dem congresswoman was busted and fined for slashing the tires of a large group of vans rented by the reps to get people to the polls.
On the other side of the coin, a number of rep “operatives” have been cited for misdirecting people to the wrong polling places, claiming the polls were closed, etc.
The truth is these things have been going on for a long time, but are now not acceptable any more. Reading historical info on Chicago, Detroit, New York, Dallas, New Orleans and Jacksonville makes it undeniable. It was just part of the game back then—not anymore.
Lets go back a ways. The first person to question the black box voting machines was a gop senate candidate running againist now Sen. Hagel. We also saw the first exit poll that were wrong, maybe, after these no paper trail boxes started to be used. Now as a DEMOCRAT I am willing to wait for the next election to throw the bums out. What I do want is a very simple paper that shows who I voted for not only in my hand but a copy for the election officals. We demand one when we put our money in a bank or pay for a hotel room etc. Why can any atm give me a receipt but my vote gets nothing in return to show how I voted. This is how freedom gets stolen. So far this year 50 million americans have had thier personal info stolen by folks in third world countries but the GOP creeps claim our votes are safe. I will buy that when the bush girls volunteer for the army.
Posted by: jack bishop at June 23, 2005 02:26 PMI have never heard of a receipt for how I voted. Why is it necessary now? Voter fraud has always been and a receipt is not going to change it. It is not how I voted, it is who voted and were they legally able to vote. There have been dead people voting for many years. There are people voting who live at addresses that do not exist. There have been felons who vote. It needs to be cleaned up, but not by the federal government. It needs to cleaned up locally by the people that it affects.
Posted by: tom at June 23, 2005 03:01 PMTony said:
And what makes me even more angry is the fact that our Republican representatives don’t have the backbone to call them out on it. Trent Lott apologizes and all hell is raised, Dick Durbin apologizes and all is forgiven. It’s a constant double standard.”
Right, like when Rep. Senator Santorum said that Democrats were like Hilter for defending the filibuster. And then he apologized and was forgiven. That stupid double standard! It makes me so angry! Oh wait…
Posted by: Julia at June 23, 2005 03:03 PMJack, you Republicans are paranoid about election fraud. The article talks about “numerous problems”, including “long lines were caused by the scarcity of voting machines in a number of precincts, particularly in minority areas” and a “clear lack of confidence in the system among African Americans” because of “gross administrative failure”.
Those exact statements where echoed by my Ohio relatives whom I visted a couple of months ago.
Posted by: Steve at June 23, 2005 03:28 PM Above the comment box, there’s a hint how to do that and a couple other text tricks. For indent quoted text in a block, do this
Thanks LawnBoy but I still cant figure it out. One more thing, I have a lot of clover in my yard this year - any suggestions?
to do blockquoted text you must type:
<blockquote>text you want indented</blockquote>
and here is the result:
text you want indentedPosted by: SirisC at June 23, 2005 04:41 PM
couple of things
i live in a 90% dem area of north east ohio.
because i changed addresses weeks before the election (in the same area but dif precincts) i voted with a provisional ballot. no biggie!!!! they work!
as a “disinfranchised” voter from the union heavy youngstown ohio area (mahoning county) i feel able to offer a firsthand “expert” view on the election.
also we had voted with the “butterfly ballot” here forever, that is until the braindead people in florida couldnt figure out how to read!!!!
it is IMPOSSIBLE to “dimple” one of these cards without punching the ballot.
well the dems DEMANDED the ballots be changed. so at great taxpayer expense, ohio changed to electronic voting. it was a 15 inch screen with 2 biga$$ boxes for kerry or bush.
if you couldnt do this right then your stupid.
yes lines were long. but sometimes you have to sweat it out in the november 60 degree clear skies we had that day to vote. im sorry if you decided it was to hard to wait, but things happen.
for those consperiancy theroy people out there saying the republicans were switching votes.
1st im sure you also beleve the moon landing was a hoax
2nd there are ufo’s hidden in area 51
3rd what voting method would you suggest we adopt.
if ohio must change voting machines again then the DNC must pay for the expense! you are the ones that approved the machines pre-election.
there is no possible voting system that can eliminate your calls for voter tanpering if you happen to get the result you dont like.
P.T.,
If you feel that I hate Democrats, or are somehow am enraged by them, my guess is you are new here, or someone that changes names to get in a “dig”?
Whatever, if your post made you feel better, I’m happy for you.
Posted by: Beagle at June 23, 2005 05:36 PMInteresting nobody mentioned the Ohio Coin-Gate Scandal currently happening there. Typical Republicans.
Posted by: Aldous at June 23, 2005 05:38 PMdisnifranchised voter~
Exactly! Read my 10:41 a.m. post, to see what I saw people referring to as “voter Fraud”!
All the reasoning in the world that people want to come up w/ as excuses, are just that excuses. And the sad part is they are giving a lot of lazy people an out!
Long lines? Tough shit wait it out….they cannot close the polls till the line is gone anyways. If you feel there were not enough polls in your district..contact your congress man and prepare for the next election.
The bottom line is no one can stop a registered voter from voting….and I still have not seen one solid case where that happened! If it happened to me you better believe the first place I would go to is the news to blare my story everywhere as soon as it happened!But no….there are just allegations after the fact.
Wise up and know your rights, you really can’t lose a right that you never knew you had though!
Beagle,
I was being ironic. Now we have a role reversal from 2000 and the Republicans have an election to complain about. I was simply flipping back the kind of accusations made against Democrats: that they were whiny losers, obsessed, lacking in patriotism, etc.
Of course, being a nice liberal that Dem governor feels like she has to be nice to the GOP…
Posted by: P.T. at June 23, 2005 05:50 PMIf you’ll notice ALL deception is defeated when the facts are known.
I’m really surprised that this story was even printed.
For the past 6 weeks or so I have challenged myself to see if I could contribute to a forum such as this.
I find that I cannot do so without becoming angry, overly spirited and emotional.
You cannot teach an old dog new tricks.
Thank you for the opportunity, however I will no longer be posting.
Posted by: steve smith at June 23, 2005 06:06 PMJulia:
“Right, like when Rep. Senator Santorum said that Democrats were like Hilter for defending the filibuster. And then he apologized and was forgiven. That stupid double standard! It makes me so angry! Oh wait…”
Yeah. Hey Julia, did you by any chance hear about the shite that Karl Rove spewed last night at a fund raiser in New York?
Rove:
“Has there ever been a more revealing moment this year? Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals.”
He also said:
“Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers,”
Nice huh? I think another apology is in order — this time direct from the chief political advisor of our “Uniter, not Divider” president…
Posted by: Adrienne at June 23, 2005 06:16 PMBeagle,
You said:
Did the Washington Compost happen to mention Anything about the real and proven fraud in wash. state gov.’s race ?I hate to confuse you with the facts, but there was no fraud in the Washington governor’s race. The Republicans tried to claim fraud, but presented no evidence other than a statistical anomaly in two precincts which had no bearing on the final outcome of the race, and the judge (the one they hand picked to hear the case) rejected their claim, saying
“There is no evidence that the significant errors which occurred resulted from intentional misconduct or someone’s desire to manipulate the election. There is no evidence that anybody associated with any of the candidates in the governor’s race had anything to do with causing the errors. There is no evidence … to suggest that the errors resulted from partisan bias.”
You can read more here Posted by: ElliottBay at June 23, 2005 07:25 PM
Adrienne,
Get a Grip…Roves comments were factual from his standpoint, they did NOT equate the actions of the Dems TO anything or any evil empire. He did not compare those actions…(BIG DIFFERENCE) If Durbin would have left out the comparisons to the historical activities of evil men/nations, He wouldn’t be in the mess he’s in…
Posted by: Cliff at June 23, 2005 08:14 PMCliff:
It is a fact that Rove, Cheney and Bush all had better things to do than Spread Liberty in Vietnam.
What we must do is urge Republicans to put up or shut up. ENLIST!!!
Posted by: Aldous at June 23, 2005 08:33 PMCliff-
Factual? I know for a fact I’m no terrorist sympathizer. I don’t think I’m alone. Rove is slandering us, and right thinking people like you are buying his bullshit. Half of this country believes Bush was not right for this job. Are half of all American’s terrorist sympathizers? Are those your facts? Next time, ask some real Democrats what we feel about the terrorists. Don’t take the number one GOP political hack’s word for it, I think he’s a little to biased to be trusted on that account.
Ah, Karl Rove, luminary of our age. Interesting things about that quote abound, but 2 immediately occur to me:
1) Liberals, no matter what they may say, are not responsible for any danger to our troops. The people in command and decision-making positions who put them in Iraq are responsible for the danger to our troops.
2) True, after 9/11, conservatives prepared for war… with a nation unconnected to the 9/11 attacks. Brilliant! Liberals, however, wanted to ask pesky questions about irrelevant topics like: how did this happen? was there an intelligence failure that led to this? shouldn’t we wait to ascertain the correct foes before heeding the unjustified clarion call to attack Iraq?
Of course, now we see the reason for the speedy conservative call to arms — time was a-wasting on lucrative business opportunities in Iraq!
I shall brace myself for an onslaught of poorly spelled retorts and subsequent pats on the back from red state reprobates who are fearful to tread in the other columns on this site.
Posted by: unkind k at June 23, 2005 08:56 PMDemocrats Say 2004 Election System Failed in Ohio
Party Concedes No Evidence of Fraud; Republican Decries ‘Political Fiction’
Yes, let’s take out our yellow markers, shall we? Does the headline say the election system failed? Why no, only that Democrats say it did. Ah, but how long does it take for the story to get to the fact that the Dems had no evidence of fraud? My goodness, it says so right in the deck, even before the story begins. And it even says Reps decry the whole thing as fiction. Again, BEFORE the story even begins. Must be the left-wingers at it again! For shame, Washington Post, mouthpiece of all those unbalanced liberal editors.
Later on in the story, the article reads, “The report said that 28 percent of all Ohio voters and 52 percent of African American voters said they had problems in voting, whether it was long lines, ballot problems, intimidation or difficulty in finding their polling place.”
Gosh, that DOES sound like a bit of a failure, doesn’t it? But maybe there’s some success associated with the following?
“The long lines were caused by the scarcity of voting machines in a number of precincts, particularly in minority areas, the report said.”
Hmm. Maybe that headline was simply dead accurate. Now, let’s look at the Watchblog headline: “Democratic Deception Defeated by Its Own Conclusions.”
That, my friends, is the true picture of objectivity.
Posted by: Reed Sanders at June 23, 2005 09:00 PM
Reed
The difference is that I write on a clearly marked partisan column. I try to spin my headlines and am proud if I can do so in a way that gets attention. I am not fair. You wouldn’t like me if I was fair.
This is my creed on this blog: I don’t knowingly lie or purposely deceive BUT I clearly write with a point of view. I write what I think is true. I don’t try to explore the other side. That is what I expect of you all. If you make a good point, I can accept that and I have learned from the other side (you included, Reed, thank you).
The Washington Post purports to be fair and I conceded the point in my intro that they included the facts. If their headlines and mine are comparable in the spin department, they may want to reconsider their ethics.
All this talk and not a single name or email to forward my Recruiter Friend.
Bah!!!
Instead of these discourse, let actions speak.
US needs Soldiers for War. Republicans Support the Iraq War. Therefore, Republicans should Enlist.
Seriously though, Jack. Can you name one Republican who recently enlisted?
Posted by: Aldous at June 23, 2005 09:47 PMThe military wouldn’t want most of the people I know. I am too old now. I tried to enlist when I was young, but was disqualified for a technical reason. For some years, however, I have served my country in a different capacity, sometimes in unhealthy or nasty places. Members of my profession have been killed in service. In fact, a colleague from my office was murdered in Iraq a couple of months ago. A society is more than the sum of its parts and you can’t tease out particular parts and make sense of them. You should give up this silly refrain of yours. In any case, I expect that many of the people who recently volunteered were Republicans and I suppose they did so for their own reasons.
I know most Dems don’t feel the way you do because I know too many honorable Dems. They know that if everyone chose to serve his country only when his own party or his own policies were in play, we wouldn’t have a country to serve.
I worked as diligently for Clinton as I do for Bush and I will work for (Hilary) Clinton if they keep me that long and she gets elected. I am American first and Republican well after that. If you can’t say the same for your party and country, I pity you, and you will never understand why.
Jack:
Cute. Still haven’t answered the question though.
As for your statement, I have family in the military. The issue is personal for me since I will undoubtedly care take of them if a parent dies. I am sure we would all fight if we were told the truth instead of this farce.
However, the fact is your President has never called for Americans to volunteer. Congressmen have never urged their constituents to serve. They even cut the Budget for Veterans Benefits!!!
I understand your position. Understand mine. American soldiers are fighting in Iraq for a lie. I understand why no one is volunteering for this. We need the men though and I say Republicans should fill it.
Posted by: Aldous at June 24, 2005 12:34 AMI do agree with Jack that “if everyone chose to serve his country only when his own party or his own policies were in play, we wouldn’t have a country to serve.” Well said.
Also, Aldous, I know two Republicans that recently signed up. Although both did so because they viewed it as the only way they could afford a downpayment on a house (enlistment bonus is up to $20K now, I think). I know one Democrat who signed up for the same reason.
While I don’t agree with the way Aldous has been pursuing the topic, I do find one point salient:
I’d be willing to fight in World War I, if needed. I’d be willing to fight in World War II, the Revolutionary War, and the Civil War. I might even have been persuaded to fight in Afghanistan. But I wouldn’t fight in Iraq. I’m not willing to die for this cause.
So, in the sense that Aldous is asking “Is Iraq worth your life?” I think most of us would answer “no”. So why is it worth someone elses?
If we can’t say “send me”, then we have no business saying “send those other people”.
If the reason for war isn’t compelling enough for you to lay down your own life, then it’s not a war worth fighting. That’s my philosophy, at least.
In any case, thanks Jack for such a thoughtful response.
Posted by: Julia at June 24, 2005 01:12 AMUS needs Soldiers for War. Republicans Support the Iraq War. Therefore, Republicans should Enlist.Seriously though, Jack. Can you name one Republican who recently enlisted?
Aldous I’m obviously not Jack, but I am a Republican, and I enlisted shortly after the war started in Iraq. I left a good job (much higher salary and less danger, stress etc.) because I believe in doing more than simply pointing out problems and attempting to fix blame ONLY. We should absolutely try to find out why things happen, but in addition to, not instead of, taking action to protect ourselves. As far as enlisting in the Services, it should not be a Dem or Rep issue, it should be an American issue.
From my own experience, which includes this, my second time being deployed to Iraq (Desert Storm was my first), most people I have met in the military are self described Conservatives and they are very proud of their service to OUR country.
Aldous,
Just a quick question, WHY DON”T YOU ENLIST? and get off other people for not doing what you will not do.
Aldous
Bryan beat me to the punch. Take refuge in the fact that if you enlist you might save a democrats butt. That way you can say something positive about one of your soul brothers.
I do not fight wars I do not believe in.
If you could guarantee that I will go to Afghanistan, I might do it. Unfortunately, there is no way to do that.
I would rather wait for the Draft if I am to go to Iraq. That way, I can be pissed without having the line “You Volunteered” thrown at me.
Posted by: Aldous at June 24, 2005 05:04 AMAldous,
I understand that you don’t believe in this war, however one does not join the military to fight in a specific location. A person joins the military because they believe that our country needs us. I was in the military under Bill Clinton, whom I absolutely despise and I disagree with almost everything he did while in office. Nevertheless, I am glad to be from a country that has the freedoms thar we have and I think that those freedoms are important enough to die for. That is why, in spite of having to endure eight years of constant underfunding, no raises, and increasing “peacekeeping” missions which stretched our forces at least as much as current operations do, I still am a proud member of the military. We don’t fight for a President, regardless of his political affiliations, we fight for our country, our families, and ultimately for our friends that are here with us. No one wants the fighting to end more than soldiers, we are the ones being injured and killed, BUT when we leave we must have accomplished something more than just creating a power vacuum for the group with the most guns. I know that this is way off topic, but since I read this site as often as possible, I felt that someone should give the view from over here.
Posted by: Bryan at June 24, 2005 05:21 AMJack, I commend your comments in this thread. Yours and other’s views of how our military personnel can’t be free to pick and choose whom they fight, are well taken.
One point needs higlighting. The US Army is considering upping the enlistment bonus to $40,000. To me, that is a megaphone statement that our Government representatives can no longer rely upon patriotism or desire to serve America in the military to meet its policy objectives. Instead of bribing Americans to serve, would our nation not be better served by selecting policies that engender voluntary service and patriotic motives?
The ever increasing dollar amount of signup bonuses is clearly sending the President and Congress the public’s message that they don’t support our involvement in Iraq. Should we continue on this mercenary path in pursuit of an unpopular war, or should we not now announce concrete plans for ending our participation in Iraq, with a date certain to pull out which puts the Iraqi’s on notice, that if they want a secure unified nation, they have to marshall the resources necessary or fail. Up to them.
I believe we owe them the opportunity to succeed. I believe it is extremely inappropriate for the Administration to guarantee their success at any cost to our own military and taxpayers, and over a protracted and indefinite time period that could be years, decades, or even generations if the Iraqi’s grow comfortable with their dependence upon our money, military manpower, and infrastructure investments.
Europe is still dependent upon our expenditures for their defense a half century later…
Posted by: David R. Remer at June 24, 2005 07:18 AM“The ever increasing dollar amount of signup bonuses is clearly sending the President and Congress the public’s message that they don’t support our involvement in Iraq.”
Dave, Not entirely true, One can argue that some people only join the military for some of the perks offered through signing up. I have heard of several people, from other military personel, the only reason they joined was for the college benefits, cash, V.A. loans, etc… and they didn’t wanted to see any kind of combat situation regardless of the reason. I’m sure there are all sorts of reasons people do or don’t join the military. Although I think that your comment was nothing more than a blanket assumption, you are entitled to your opinion.
Posted by: Kevin at June 24, 2005 08:33 AMI am American first and Republican well after that. If you can’t say the same for your party and country, I pity you, and you will never understand why.
Your rather self-righteous reply doesn’t explain why more supporters of the war aren’t helping to fill the recruiting gaps. If people who are against the war should overcome their “political” (aka moral) objections and sign up, then people who are FOR the war should CERTAINLY sign up. (I don’t mean you personally, but the general mass of young, jingoistic Republicans.)
I find it ironic that Bush gets so much credit for being popular with the troops. He’s a great boss, but people don’t want to work with him!
Kevin, the facts speak for themselves. We had no problem filling enlistment quotas before invading Iraq. In fact, after 9/11 there was a surge. Today, we can’t fill the quotas even with signup bonuses.
You can spin how you will, the facts speak for themselves.
Posted by: David R. Remer at June 24, 2005 09:28 AMDavid,
Not a spin, just another point to look at, which happens to be fact.
I thought you Libs were champions of all points of view? Or is that only when it fits your agenda?
Posted by: Kevin at June 24, 2005 09:39 AMThe difference is that I write on a clearly marked partisan column. I try to spin my headlines and am proud if I can do so in a way that gets attention.
True, jack. It was not a fair comparison.
Posted by: Reed Sanders at June 24, 2005 10:40 AMThank you all for your constructive criticism.
Is there any News Agencies you folks trust?
There are no Liberals or Conservatives. They’re buzz words meant to divide the country so that this(HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING REPUBLICAN)corrupt administration can avoid accountability.The longer you folks wear your lable of Conservative or Moralists or whatever they lable you with next,the longer the government(Both Parties!)will only cater to the wealthy and ignore the poor and middle class. I can’t for the life of me figure out why you folks love these lables.You wear them like badges of honor just like children with smiley stickers. Wake up guys! I’m not the enemy,the government has changed.Corporate greed,Lobbyists,kick backs,croniism and agendas that increase theirs and their associates wealth at the cost of the citizens of this country is the problem. Democrats and Republicans have scapegoats, each other. You folks just follow along like good sheep enjoying your lables.
Woody
I am self righteous about this because it is a righteous situation. We should certainly be more interested in our country than our party, even if you believe the President lied to get us into a war. You can argue against the President. That should be the only target of your ire. As an American you have no business advocating a particular political party be the only one that fights. That is wrong from so many angles; it would take a whole book to explain, but let me just appeal to self-interest. If the military becomes overwhelming representative of only one party, it is dangerous to the liberty of the other parties. If Aldous got what he wanted, he wouldn’t want it.
We can well argue about whether or not the U.S. should be in any particular war. You can rightly criticize an individual who doesn’t act in accordance with his stated values. But the reason people do things (or not) are complicated and not always easy to judge. The facile statement that all those who support the President and believe the war needs to be won should join the military is simple minded. It might seem a clever dilemma the first couple times you hear it, but after the first dozen, it just gets old.
You also have to remember that most members of the military don’t engage in close combat and most civilian individuals are not qualified for that job anyway. It really is not something everyone can volunteer to do.
Finally, about bonuses. Compensation is a big issue for everyone. We are already asking people to take on a dangerous job that may cost them in terms of lost wages. It doesn’t hurt to make it more financially attractive.
It reminds me of the old saying that locks don’t stop thieves; they keep honest men honest. A similar dynamic is true of compensation.
I also see this as good social policy. As a Republican, I am usually suspicious of these things, but I like this one because it rewards people who make good choices and will probably help those who can then help themselves when they get out of the military. It is like the GI Bill. It helped many individuals, but the biggest beneficiary was American itself.
Typical Republican gambit. When in you’re in a tight spot, insinuate that your opponent is a Bush-hater who lacks patriotic fervor.
Posted by: Woody Mena at June 24, 2005 11:35 AMJack,
You make an exellent point about compensation.
I wonder how many know; Joining the military, and signing up for Iraq duty, Is much safer than signing on to an Alaskan fishing crew?
About those big enlistment bonuses; they’re not for everyone. They only apply to whichever job skills are in need at the moment.
The biggest problem with the Army; (I can’t speak for the other 4 services) is the lack of combat soldiers. The Combat soldier is the one who is actually trained to fight, all soldiers have basic combat skills but, are not precision trained in Raids, ambushes, reacting to enemy fire, calling for artillery or air support and so on. Much of the Army is made up of cooks, medics, supply people, people who fix radios, mechanics and so on, and as I already stated, though they do have basic combat training, their specialized skills are not combat related.
This leads to a problem when you consider each soldier’s OPTEMPO (a term referring to how long a soldier is away from his home and family) The OPTEMPO for the combat soldier is becoming over taxed, because we do not have enough. I’m not saying we don’t have enough in the Iraq. We don’t have enough in the Army. You can’t continue to send soldiers to Iraq for a year and then bring them home for a few months and then send them to Afghanistan…or Sinai, Korea, Germany, Bosnia or anywhere else.
The strategy of the draw down during 90’s depended too heavily on the reserve and guard units. Frankly, those are the soldiers who were there to protect the USA. We don’t have the full time military strength to make the world a better place.
Woody
You must be getting another version of the postings here. Jack said not word about patriotism or Bush-hater. I must conclude that you are in some cloud of delusion and martyrdom syndrom. When questioned about why one says and thinks about a subject sometimes when an individual cannot think of anything sensible to say they go on the defensive and to some other zone. That is how I read your response to Jack.
Martyr? No problem, I can take it. I do not feel persecuted. However, I can read:
We should certainly be more interested in our country than our party, even if you believe the President lied to get us into a war. You can argue against the President. That should be the only target of your ire. As an American you have no business…Posted by: Woody Mena at June 24, 2005 01:22 PM
Woody
Thinking about what you thought about what your thought I said, you may be right.
When Clinton was president, I didn’t accept it when some Republicans would say “your president” when talking to Democrats. It is unpatriotic. We can disagree with our president and criticize him, but we have to recognize that he is OUR president, elected by the majority of our fellow citizens.
I guess I do consider it unpatriotic for someone to say that only members of one party should be represented in the military or only members of one party bear the responsibility for protecting the United States. Hating Bush is not unpatriotic. Implying that his being president absolves some part of the population of its civic responsibilities is unpatriotic.
I don’t think you are among those people by the way. You and I are talking about nuanced views in an intellectual context.
But anyone who really believes that party trumps country is unpatriotic and I don’t believe we need be tolerant of those sorts of views. We can take them at their word that they don’t want to be part of the country.
Woody
How do you get Bush-hater or unpatriotic in that short quote. You can be against a person without hating them. You can be against policy without being unpatriotic. You read into the quote some self serving charges.
Tom said:
I have never heard of a receipt for how I voted. Why is it necessary now?
Because with the advent of electronic voting machines voter fraud is now possible on a scale never before seen! Did you see the documentary about the Diebold voting machine that Black Box Voting put together? The central database that is used to tally the votes from all the machines is an Access database sitting on a normal Windows desktop machine! Maybe most people don’t understand what this means, but I have designed database-based information systems for 10 years…and the Access datbase is a joke! It’s Microsoft’s play database and has essentially no security features worth their salt (to get a real database you have to upgrade to SQL Server).
I’m trying to keep this non-partisan, and I’m NOT stating that I think election fraud occurred in Ohio or anywhere else…just that it IS possible for it to happen, and can be done without leaving ANY trail of evidence. In fact, it can be done by a single person sitting in their office without anyone else ever being able to detect it—one single person changing many thousands of votes with no way to ever prove they did it! This is why we need that paper trial…and remember that the one person sitting alone in their office and changing votes could be either a Democrat or a Republican…
Posted by: Charles Wager at June 24, 2005 03:53 PMAldous,
“I have family in the military.” WHOOPY!!!!!!!!!!!
Put your butt there, then call for others to enlist.
I have family oin the military too. A son, a son-in-law, 2 nephews (soon to be 3), and a neice.
I served for 20 years, and have very little respect for those that want eveyone else to serve but won’t serve themselves.
Bryan,
TAHNKYOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY.
Ron,
You have “very little respect” for Bush and Cheney? That’s not very nice!
Posted by: Woody Mena at June 24, 2005 06:03 PMWoody,
BUSH DID SERVE. The gaurd and reserves a as much a part of the military as the active service is.
I donn’t know much about Cheney weather he served or not. But then I’ve never been to crazy about him anyway.
Has everyone been watching the disturbing, disgusting actions of our elected Senators and how they are attacking everything and anyone?
If you have, then you realize that the American public has no choice in the political process anymore, two parties full of bickering children, what choice is that?
The National American Party is being formed, a party that will welcome anyone that has a sense of where the nation needs to be and how it will get there. The platform is very simple, America back to the basics! The United Nations must leave American soil immediately. The national borders will be sealed and those entering illegally will be executed onsight. Welfare will no longer exist in anyform that we could recognize today. The war in Iraq will be brought to the only conclusion, total victory. No more “warm and fuzzy” tactics, only raw warfare. All other troops will be brought home to assist in providing national security. No more foreign assistance of anykind. Foreign policy will be one of “America First” in every negoiation. The legalization of all vices, controlled and taxed by the government. The reduction of all Congressional and Senatorial salaries. No more sweet “retirement” deal. No more National Education Association, public schools will return to the basic education and will demand strict compliance with policy. Religious freedom without Supreme Court interaptations, public prayer and recognition of all beliefs. Mandatory death penalities for murder, rape, child molestation, kidnapping, and all other serious breeches of the law. No appeal.
This is just the beginning of shaping a platform designed to be blunt, straight forward and without shades of gray.
If you think it is time for the National American Party, then voice your feelings and tell me what you want in the platform of a party that you can count on to “Get It Done’!
Posted by: stivdi at June 24, 2005 06:55 PMCharles Wagner
Any election process that has one person only doing input or verification of data is a very flawed system. Almost every place that I know of, which of course is not all places, has a republican and a democrat at the place of exchange. Therefore the attempt to try to alter the election would have to be done with a republican and a democrat in on the colusion. For instance in most states when a person signs in to vote, he/she must produce evidence that they are who they are. Then they sign on a tablet their name as it appears on the voting records. In AZ the tally is done by a machine that needs to be confirmed by a member of both parties before it is forwarded to election central. All papers, forms, lists, etc. must total up exactly. It would be very difficult to do any voting fraud in our system. Other states may have a considerablely different system that may let fraud in the door. Also, no system is fool proof. The main thing is having a member of both major parties present when verification, changes, signatures, etc. are done to very compliance with the law.
Ron,
My understanding is that in the Vietnam era that National Guard was a great way to keep one’s “butt” out of Vietnam. (I know this is not true anymore.) And no one remembers Bush showing up in Alabama…
Cheney received at least three deferments and did not serve in the military.
But this whole argument is strange because you and Aldous basically agree: people who want to send others to war should serve themselves.
TOM,
Any election process that has one person only doing input or verification of data is a very flawed system.
Unfortunately, everything is automated in the age of computers, which is exactly my point. None of the tabulating is being done by hand, which is the whole point of using electronic voting machines. The actual Diebold voting machines may be monitored at the polling places, but after the election their results are all uploaded to a “Central Tabulater”, which is a single Windows PC where the votes are counted using more Diebold specific software. The database containing the counts is accessible from outside their software, however. The Central Tabulator is the machine which can be easily hacked, as has been demonstrated:
Unless this machine is monitored around the clock by a Democrat and a Republican (and it wasn’t in Ohio, to give one example), then the results are subject to tampering. Can you give me a good reason why we shouldn’t have a paper trail…if only to give people more confidence in our election process and thus in our democracy?
Posted by: Charles Wager at June 25, 2005 12:28 AMPaper ballots are also subject to manipulation. Election official often “find” whole boxes of ballots in close races. Disputed ballots get mixed with valid ones. People argue about the intent of the voter.
The truth is that in any close election, there will be lots of disputes and the loser will feel cheated.
One thing to remember: this last election was not close. There was no legitimate reason to suspect that anything done changed the elections. Even Dem officials admit that.
Posted by: jack at June 25, 2005 09:01 AMThe problem with Democratic deception is the size and scale of the deception. Democrats really need to take a page from the Republican playbook and think worldwide when deceiveing people. Can you say “WMD in Iraq” or “Iraq (Sadamm) and Al Quaeda are connected” ? Oh wait, I’m off topic, we are discussing Democratic deception…
Posted by: sdiddy at June 25, 2005 09:45 AMDid anyone mention, that all these problems at the voting boothes and the shortage of machines, have been in Demoratic controlled areas.
Posted by: peter J. Klanko at June 25, 2005 10:33 AMPeter,
You failed to mention that election officials at the state level presiding over these problem areas are Republican. I’m sure that is an oversight…
Posted by: sdiddy at June 25, 2005 11:29 AMThis article from the Post is just another example of Democrat’s trying to blame their loss on something other than the fact that they did not have ideas that resonate with the American public. I could care less about whether or not people gave up and went home because the lines were too long. These are the same people who will wait in line for hours and hours to get on a ride at Disneyland or to see the new Star Wars movie, but they will not wait in line for a few hours to vote, something that is much more important than Disneyland.
It is amazing that people in other countries will risk their lives, such as in Iraq, or wait in line for days to vote, but we will not. The Democrats alwasy cry disenfranchisment, but they never offer any proof. If they want to cry disenfranchisement lets talk about the 1960 presidential election and the stealing of votes by the Democrats in Illinois.
Posted by: Nathan Melton at June 25, 2005 02:57 PMRove’s comments were directed at moveon.org and other Lt wing nut orgs. At no time did he mention democrats. Isn’t is amazing how quickly Hitlery and her clan lept in front of the Cameras? I guess hitlery’s move to the middle was a fake move? If there is one thing that burns my A$$ is the liberals who whine and cry over lost elections as if somehow they are going to change the outcome by destroying the credibility of the country. Dick Trubin Durbin’s comments were over the top! The simple minded liberals either are blinded by hate, or are just too ignorant to understand that what they do serves no one but the terrorists. The Dems motto seems to be “Give the Terrorists another Day to fight for”. Which is it? Ignorance or hatred? It has to be one or the other.
Getting back to the conspiracy:It’s evident that Dean is a republican plant. There is no other explaination!
{If the Hillbillys in TN want vote for GORE that should tell you something (I’m a Hillbilly)}. Could it be that the people who voted in this past election saw kerry for what he was? A do nothing liberal who want even show up for work in the Senate.
Gore who well lets just say has a few mental issues especially since his loss to GW.
Thank god. Oops Can I say that? Well thank someone or something that at least there were enough people to keep John Kerry, and Al Gore in their respective states. I wonder what crime the Demo’s will use to discredit the elections they lose in 2006?
A man is only a fool when he does the same stupid thing TWICE! The Dems I forecast will do it three times! Anyone want to take my bet?
Ken,
The simple minded liberals either are blinded by hate, or are just too ignorant to understand that what they do serves no one but the terrorists.
Your own hate is showing…you could see that if you weren’t blinded by it.
Posted by: Charles Wager at June 26, 2005 08:34 PM
