Operation Elephant Takeover

Democrats and the Kerry campaign engaged in election fraud and dirty tricks in Wisconsin— so where’s the news media?! Where’s the 24 hour coverage? Where’s the ‘Culture of Corruption’ headlines? Where are the protests demanding every vote be counted?!

The standard Democrat line is that Republicans 'steal' elections. Republicans must be corrupt because Democrats never lose fair elections. But when we look closely at the real fraud, it's committed by Democrats. Imagine that.

MILWAUKEE -- It was a third-rate political caper uncovered by a vigilant night watchman, a scheme that some suggest goes far deeper than the low-level suspects rounded up by police.

But unlike the 1972 Watergate burglary, the fallout from an Election Day 2004 sabotage plot here is more farce than drama. Five local Democratic activists are accused of slashing the tires on Republican-rented vehicles, crippling the party's poll watching and get out the vote efforts in a state that was vital in a close presidential race.

The trial has pitted Democrat against Democrat: Defense lawyers say the young men are taking the fall for a plan hatched by out-of-state operatives, insinuating that it was part of a nationwide dirty tricks campaign to defeat President Bush. ~chicago tribune

This was a planned operation by Kerry campaign workers. This was not just a single rogue or anti-social individual who felt like committing an act of vandalism, this was a planned operation by paid staff of the Kerry campaign, with both in-state and out-of-state workers. Sons of prominent Democratic officials no less.

What are the chances that if this had been 'Bush campaign operatives' who came in from out of town to set this up, with the children of Republican officials doing the dirty work, that this wouldn't be front page news-- every single day of their trial? The silence from both the mainstream media and the Democratic Party is deafening.

Something key about the bias in this very story (the portion I quoted) is that it gets several facts wrong. It would never be characterized as, "more farce than drama," if these were Republicans. Certainly, not with the over arching importance attached to every single Democratic vote (which must be counted!). Secondly, these were dedicated paid campaign workers not activists. Activists are people who show up at protests of the world bank and the WTO with hoods on, prepared to throw rocks and molatov cocktails at Starbucks. No one can hold the DNC or the Kerry campaign responsible for crazed 'activists', but these people seem to be in fact employees of the Kerry Campaign.

Count Every Democrat Vote (twice if need be)?

I think Kerry should stand up and make a statement about this very real despoiling of democracy in Wisconsin. Why hasn't he made any statement about the fear and the disenfranchisement in Wisconsin? Is it possible that he had knowledge of this activity? Was this a national effort? Does every vote count only when the vote is for a (D)?

Kerry should disavow this activity and come clean about any involvement or knowledge his national campaign had. It's obvious that Republican voters can fear that they will be prevented from getting to the polls in Wisconsin directly because of the Kerry Campaign. Having shown such passion for "counting every vote" and ensuring that everyone has a chance to vote, certainly he could at the very least comment on this?

Yet, thousands upon thousands of Americans still fear that when they walk into the polls to vote, there is a very real chance that their vote will not be counted or they will lose the opportunity to vote at all because they are forced to stand in line for hours due to a shortage of machines.

...Senator John Kerry is committed to making sure that all Americans have faith in future elections that the votes they stand in line to cast are counted. ~JohnKerry.com

Their votes should be counted, -IF- they can get to the polls after his campaign workers slash your tires!

Kerry only seems concerned when a democratic voter is being menaced by illusory Republican 'voter intimidation' or Republican 'dirty tricks', frequently alleged but never shown to be true. How many times have you heard of Republican 'activists' slashing the tires of the DNC's get out the vote vehicles? Or printing up 'extra' ballots in order to pad the margins of victory?

The GOP rented more than 100 vehicles that were parked in a lot adjacent to a Bush campaign office. The party planned to drive poll watchers to polling places by 7 a.m. and deliver any voters who didn't have a ride.

A criminal complaint said the defendants originally planned to put up Democratic yard signs, placards and bumper stickers at the Republican office [Right. Wink. Wink. I suppose they planned to spread sunshine and lollipops too.] in a scheme they called "Operation Elephant Takeover." But the plan was dropped when they learned a security guard was posted at the GOP office, the complaint said.

One witness told investigators the five defendants, dressed in "Mission Impossible"-type gear, black outfits and knit caps, left the Democratic Party headquarters at about 3 a.m. on Nov. 2, and returned about 20 minutes later, extremely excited and talking about how they had slashed the tires.

Rick Graber, chairman of the Republican Party of Wisconsin said the stunt threw a wrench in its get-out-the-vote effort. Moreover, he said, Wisconsin was one of the most highly contested states, where Kerry ultimately won by a little more than 10,000 votes.

"When you're looking at a margin of only 10,000 votes, every person counts," Graber said. ~findlaw

Though the Wisconsin Democratic Party says it has done nothing wrong, Democrats and the Democratic Governor of Wisconsin are no stranger to election fraud and illegality in Wisconsin. Far from the recent attempts to smear Republicans by making Abramoff an icon of the 'culture of corruption' Democrats actually know what they are talking about when it comes to corruption, because they've written so many chapters in the book on it.

Authorities investigating a state travel contract given to a major donor to Gov. Jim Doyle's campaign are also looking for links between donations from utility executives and state regulators' approval of the sale of a nuclear power plant, sources said.

The probe began after a utility company whistleblower complained to the state attorney general's office in November about possibly improper contacts last year between one of the utilities and top aides at the state Public Service Commission. ~Wisconsin State Journal

----------

Kenosha County District Attorney Robert Jambois removed himself today from the investigation of bribery at a Democratic-sponsored bingo party due to a conflict of interest, according to Chris Lato, a spokesman for the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

...Jambois is a member of the steering committee for the Jim Doyle for Governor campaign. Democratic campaign organizer Angela Arrington and Doyle supporter Frank Santapaolo also attended the event, according to Lato.

Lato said a new attorney has been assigned to the case. The RPW charged the Doyle campaign with bribing mentally disabled voters at a Kenosha health care facility with pastries, soda and money in exchange for votes.

"Food changed hands here where absentee ballots were laid out to vote. That is a felony," said Lato. "Bob Jambois did the right thing by stepping aside."

Democratic Party of Wisconsin spokesman Thad Nation said the DPW would participate in any investigation, but dismissed allegations that Doyle had prior knowledge of the bingo party or that the event was illegal in any way. ~Daily Cardinal

----------

Numerous state legislators are facing trial due to allegations of indiscretion related to campaign finance reform at the state level.

Several state senators and representatives are accused of allowing aides to campaign on state time, spending taxpayer dollars on a private operation.

Some state legislators have already been convicted, including former Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala, D-Madison, former Sen. Brian Burke, D-Milwaukee and former state Rep. Bonnie Ladwig, R-Racine.

Chvala was sentenced to nine months in jail after pleading guilty to two felony counts for illegally running a third-party group in the 2000 elections and using state workers and resources for a 1998 campaign.

Seventeen other counts, including extortion, were dismissed because of a plea deal. ~Daily Cardinal

How to steal an election

Beyond just slashing tires, the Democratic party wanted to make sure that 'safe' blue states stayed safe for Kerry in 2004. After all, it was the most important election of our lifetimes! Way too important to lose, and apparently too important to play by the rules. "If we do not step backfrom the verge now, it may be to late to have any hope at all for salvaging our already deeply damaged democracy...." (Veterans for peace )

And also, lives were at stake! So perhaps we have a motive for the left's attempt to take a few liberties with the system in order to ensure the survival of democracy, eh?

Let me explain how I think Democrats planned to steal the election in Wisconsin.

Kerry won by some 11,000 votes in Wisconsin in 2004. A pretty slim margin. It gets even slimmer when you start looking at the possible voter fraud.

Democratic officials have failed to cover up all of the evidence pointing to voter fraud in Wisconsin, which is why the FBI will finally be investigating why the, "number of ballots cast and the number of people who can be identified as voting in the presidential election," just happen to equal about 11,000 votes in Wisconsin, according to the Journal Sentinel.

Let me repeat this, because it bears repeating: the number of ballots cast and the number of people who can be identified as voting in the presidential election in Wisconsin equal or exceed 11,000 votes.

They have 11,000 more ballots 'cast' than people who voted. Absentee ballots were not counted until weeks after the election, people were listed as voting twice... when you see an election system that is so poorly run, you have to wonder if it's on purpose-- in order to rig the election. Especially when it is Democratic officials who demand that voters should be able to register the day of the election, and then refuse to support any efforts to verify the actual identity or addresses of these voters.

Those problems ranged from registration cards that weren't processed before the election to absentee ballots that were not counted until weeks after the election.

And a new Journal Sentinel review of the city's voting records shows the system is so flawed that more than 300 people are listed as voting twice from the same address, even though each apparently was given only one ballot.

That increases the size of a gap, already at more than 8,300, between the number of ballots cast and the number of people who can be identified as voting in the presidential election, which in Wisconsin was determined by about 11,000 votes.

...The problem surfaced as the Journal Sentinel tried to check whether anyone voted twice in the election and hundreds of potential duplicates popped up, in contrast to four years ago, when the paper found no one who voted twice in the city.

...McCann's announcement comes after a series of revelations by the newspaper that have left critics worrying that the problems signal either bureaucratic blundering or widespread fraud, [or both] though they can't determine which because the system itself is so messed up.

...The Journal Sentinel found 314 cases where this may have occurred with the same address listed twice, and many others cases where people with identical and uncommon names are listed as voting at two addresses - perhaps due to reregistering at their new address on election day. ~Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

It's useful if you are planning on voter fraud for the system to be in disarray. It's also useful to demand that voters not be required to show id when they vote. Of course, slashing tires can be effective as well. It's just not as sophisticated.

(For the record I also believe that any electronic voting must have a receipt and attempt to have multiple ways of verifying tallys.)

We begin to see the premeditation of this electoral corruption when we remember Democrats laying down a justification for 'having too many ballots' by saying that, "every vote must count, and every vote must be counted," and making it seem as if there is an emergency need for more ballots.

Gov. Jim Doyle calling for a state probe and County Executive Scott Walker agreeing after a noisy protest to reconsider the City of Milwaukee's request for more ballots. Doyle said later, however, that he wanted the state Elections Board to promptly investigate and determine how many ballots are needed by Milwaukee, which requested 938,000 from the county. The county agreed to provide 679,000, noting that the city had only 382,000 registered voters as of September. ~Journal Sentinel

Democrats are protesting because they're afraid that their democratically controlled state will disenfranchise them?! What to do? ...Order more ballots! Governor Doyle (D), said in the article that he'd never seen a lack of ballots like this before! Aghast, he said that it's an abuse of authority not to give the city however many ballots it thought it needed... (to rig the election!) I think that Democrats shrewdly planned to have multiple ballots available-- for voting early and often. All this guff about making sure they have 300% more ballots than they need for every registered voter is ludicrous. Just read the words of the democratic 'activist' Rashad Younger, protesting for more ballots, when he says he and his friends 'might' mess up their ballots and need to 'revote'. Sure Rashad, that explains why the election system in Wisconsin is in utter chaos and ruin, and more ballots are needed to 'fix it'.

Doyle said the eyes of the nation might be focused on Wisconsin on election day because of its swing-state status in a tight presidential contest, and he wants to make sure things run smoothly.

...Rashad Younger, president of the Marquette University Black Student Council, told Walker that he and other first-time voters might mess up their ballots and need to revote. Ballot supplies should reflect that, he said.

In fliers for their march to the courthouse for Thursday's meeting, Marquette and Milwaukee Area Technical College students accused Walker of following the path of others in history who have tried to suppress the black vote. The flier mentioned black voters disenfranchised in the Florida election in the disputed 2000 presidential race.

Walker has raised fraud concerns related to excess ballots possibly being grabbed by voters. Doug Haag, chairman of the county commission, said he worried about a repeat of an incident in 2000 when some ballots flew off the back of a city truck.

District Attorney E. Michael McCann, who attended the meeting, said he saw no connection between excess ballots and fraud because of security measures at the polls. [Imagine that.] But he added he was concerned about the propriety of some turnout drives that pay workers for registering voters. ~Journal Sentinel

What I want to know is how far the campaign, "to make sure things run smoothly," in the 2004 election went. Because Democrats used the same arguments all over the United States. They opposed identification of voters, but encouraged multiple ballots, not to mention the fact that dimples and pregnant chads are always votes for a democrat. Evidence of padding voter registration with fake voters, pre-registering ineligible voters, and other voting fraud and intimidation was rife in this last election, predominantly by Democrats desparate to regain power.

Posted by Eric Simonson at January 24, 2006 2:53 AM
Comments
Comment #116076

“Can you tell us about some of your e-voting machine hacking activities? On Tuesday, Dec. 13, we conducted a hack of the Diebold AccuVote optical scan device. I wrote a five-line script in Visual Basic that would allow you to go into the central tabulator and change any vote total you wanted, leaving no logs.”

____________________________________________
“Sancho’s most recent demonstration was last month. Harri Hursti, a computer security expert from Finland, manipulated the “memory card” that records the votes of ballots run through an optical scanning machine

…Sancho and seven other people held a referendum. The question on the ballot

“Can the votes of this Diebold system be hacked using the memory card?”

Two people marked yes on their ballots, and six no. The optical scan machine read the ballots, and the data were transmitted to a final tabulator. The result? Seven yes, one no.

“Was it possible for a disgruntled employee to do this and not have the elections administrator find out?” Sancho asked. “The answer was yes”“
________________________________________________

Posted by: Aldous at January 24, 2006 3:36 AM
Comment #116077

Thank god for you Aldous. Some people tell me that you don’t exist.

What are you saying exactly?

Posted by: esimonson at January 24, 2006 3:39 AM
Comment #116078

Ever wonder why the Exit Polls in Florida never matched the results made by Diebold Voting Machines?

__________________________________________________
“The State of Florida, for example, publishes a county-by-county record of votes cast and people registered to vote by party affiliation. Net denizen Kathy Dopp compiled the official state information into a table, available at http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm, and noticed something startling.

While the heavily scrutinized touch-screen voting machines seemed to produce results in which the registered Democrat/Republican ratios largely matched the Kerry/Bush vote, in Florida’s counties using results from optically scanned paper ballots - fed into a central tabulator PC and thus vulnerable to hacking – the results seem to contain substantial anomalies.

In Baker County, for example, with 12,887 registered voters, 69.3% of them Democrats and 24.3% of them Republicans, the vote was only 2,180 for Kerry and 7,738 for Bush, the opposite of what is seen everywhere else in the country where registered Democrats largely voted for Kerry.

In Dixie County, with 9,676 registered voters, 77.5% of them Democrats and a mere 15% registered as Republicans, only 1,959 people voted for Kerry, but 4,433 voted for Bush.

The pattern repeats over and over again - but only in the counties where optical scanners were used. Franklin County, 77.3% registered Democrats, went 58.5% for Bush. Holmes County, 72.7% registered Democrats, went 77.25% for Bush.

Yet in the touch-screen counties, where investigators may have been more vigorously looking for such anomalies, high percentages of registered Democrats generally equaled high percentages of votes for Kerry. (I had earlier reported that county size was a variable – this turns out not to be the case. Just the use of touch-screens versus optical scanners.) “

Posted by: Aldous at January 24, 2006 3:46 AM
Comment #116109

Hey what’s the deal
Your beloved ass of a president was re-elected for another term. So I don’t see the problem…

Yes dirty tactics are used by both sides, this is politics right. Finding a good wholesome politician in this age (no matter the party of affiliation) is just as impossible as finding a(n)actual 40 year old virgin. So do me a favor Eric, when you wake up and read a few of the responses read this one and GET OVER YOURSELF!!!!!!!!

On a side note I’m actually quite glad Bush was re-elected. Because He actually gave a lot of inner city kids hope. I mean if that crack-head can make it, than there is hope for all of us.
Thanks and GOOD DAY

Posted by: black&pissed at January 24, 2006 6:39 AM
Comment #116131

Vote Early and vote often.

Posted by: Ynot at January 24, 2006 7:59 AM
Comment #116139

You have all these ideas of what Kerry should do? Why pick on him? He accepted the loss without grumbling.

The best defense is a good offense. You steal an election as evidenced by Aldous and Adrienne on many occasions, then you better get to work accusing the other side. That way people like black&pissed above conclude dirty tactics are used by both sides and its all a wash.

Posted by: Schwamp at January 24, 2006 8:29 AM
Comment #116157

Yes, I am sure Kerry called these kids personally and had them slash the Republican campaigner’s car tires. This is so laughable only Republicans could seriously believe it.

Posted by: Max at January 24, 2006 9:44 AM
Comment #116164

Schwamp

There are always accusation. The Dems (like Aldous) make a lot of them that don’t pan out, or they are “possible”. When you look at actual charges, you find Dems involved in a lot more. Dems talk in generalities about long lines and about minorities being inconvenienced. They never go beyond innuendo. It manages to inflame the easily fooled, but most people see beyond it when they stop to notice.

Slashing tires, however, is a crime and one with evidence. It is not the same and NO Republicans have not done similar things.

Posted by: Jack at January 24, 2006 10:00 AM
Comment #116166

“Yes, I am sure Kerry called these kids personally and had them slash the Republican campaigner’s car tires”

Like Bush personally told the soldiers at AG to do that and take pics?
Like Bush personally told the military to send the troops into war without any body armor?
Like Bush personally planned 9-11?
Like how Bush personally told police to erect roadblocks and deter black voters?
Like how Bush personally told Diebold to have problems?
etc… etc…

Whats laughable is how the left demands accountablity from the right but makes excuses when it comes to holding their own accountable.

Posted by: kctim at January 24, 2006 10:03 AM
Comment #116168
so where’s the news media?! Where’s the 24 hour coverage?

Eric, I’m not sure what you’re complaining about. The tire slashing made the news at the time — as did the diverting of polling machines away from Democratic precincts in Ohio.

Let me explain how I think Democrats planned to steal the election…

Oh, I see. You’re mad because the media doesn’t cover the wacked out ravings of right wing conspiracy theorists.

Good luck with that, Eric. :)

Posted by: American Pundit at January 24, 2006 10:10 AM
Comment #116171

Max and Schwamp:

Attached is an article that shows why Republicans tend to get heated up over issues like the one Eric brings up. The article discusses how Democrats are actually investigated by the House Ethics committee more often than Republicans are, but that the reporting of Republicans being investigated is more prevalent.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-1_24_06_BB.html

The people that Eric refers to deserve justice. It needs to be investigated who knew what they were doing, who suggested or ordered them to do it, and how high up the chain the knowledge was. We all know it won’t be proven that higher ups in the campaign knew about it, even if they did know. But just as Abramoff is being investigated, or Republican voting irregularities are looked at, this issue deserves the same level of due diligence.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at January 24, 2006 10:15 AM
Comment #116172
Slashing tires, however, is a crime and one with evidence. It is not the same and NO Republicans have not done similar things.

Jack, are you being naive or deliberately misleading?

James Tobin, the president’s 2004 campaign chairman for New England, is charged in New Hampshire federal court with four felonies accusing him of conspiring with a state GOP official and a GOP consultant in Virginia to jam Democratic and labor union get-out-the-vote phone banks in November 2002.

kctim,

Whats laughable is how the left demands accountablity from the right but makes excuses when it comes to holding their own accountable.

Nobody’s defending the tire slashing. What’s laughable is how blinded by hate the right wing is, to the point that they see crackpot conspiracies everywhere.

Posted by: American Pundit at January 24, 2006 10:17 AM
Comment #116173
The article discusses how Democrats are actually investigated by the House Ethics committee more often than Republicans are

Umm… Is it because Republicans control the House Ethics Committee and refuse to investigate their fellow Republicans? JBOD, the committee even passed on investigating Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham.

Posted by: American Pundit at January 24, 2006 10:20 AM
Comment #116179

In a phrase: “The fix is in”. Back to paper ballots!

Posted by: Blogical at January 24, 2006 10:28 AM
Comment #116183

Bullshit. If this is what you’re reduced to, I’m sorry. You have a nationwide scandal with a mainly Republican operative involved (I know, nobodies perfect), multiple instances of cronyism and disappearing money, and your answer is tire slashing, and a Democratic governor asking for more ballots on the eve of what in fact turned out to be the highest turnout election, numerically speaking, in U.S. history.

Irregularities did show up. Our electronic voting system did turn out to have big flaws in accountability and changeability. There really were voting irregularities in Ohio, most of them breaking for your side.

I just want you to keep this in mind: a purely apologetic stance, like that you take, is bound sooner or later to blind you to the flaws in your party you need to fix. Half the time, when I make my posts, who do you think they are addressing? It is as much for the Blue Column’s benefit, as it is for the Green and the Red.

What you’re doing to your party is letting the outrages spin out of your control, failing to put the brakes on the crap that is essentially undermining your party’s moral license to lead. You blame the Democrats for bringing these things up and keeping them out in the public eye, but the truth is, we are your competitors. It is strange that those who zealously defend the principles of a free market cannot comprehend that the Democrats would want to undermine the right’s hold on power. That would be the nature of things even without the massive screw-ups. I don’t know why you take the naive position that the Republicans should be allowed to rule unchallenged, unopposed, unquestioned. That just isn’t realistic.

As it is, What Republicans have done is traded image for substance. I was watching George Stephanopoulis’s Sunday program, and the Republican Intelligence Committee member was trying to parse out what the meaning of the word Committee could be, whether that was the chair, or everybody. The Ranking Democrat was able to simply say, the Committee is the Committee. She could give the intuitive answer, the common sense one.

This has become the leading Republican flaw. They can’t answer a simple question with a simple answer. They can’t point to a explicit legal justification for their wiretaps, so they dance around, citing implicit authority, even in the face of obvious constitutional questions. While the Democrats can scare people with the substance of what constitutional violations mean, Republicans have to resort to the unprovable assertion that such violations are necessary to protect the American people, and worse lie their asses off about the Democrats willingness to let the president do legitimate surveillance.

They look at Katrina, and instead of accepting blame, they pass the buck to the devastated local and state governments, who regardless of their preparedness just got hit with one of the strongest storms in decades. They look at the the sloth and bureaucratic ineptness, and they either make self-serving sermons on how much more efficiently the market would take care of things, or make even more callous statements about how the market doesn’t want New Orleans rebuilt, or that the victims are responsible for so foolishly building their city below sea level. Anything to avoid the substantial failures of the response.

Iraq and the war we fight their are victims of this image over substance attitude. The Right defined defeatism not only as wishing or predicting America’s defeat, but instead also including anybody who tried to put backup plans in there, the idea being that one only needs backup plans when one’s plan fails. They didn’t believe their plan would fail.

Sooner or later, your approach brings and unrealistic approach to policy about, and thereby divorces the party from the substance of its actions. When that happens, the collapse of image and reputation is inevitable.

You think instead of hounding us for our problems, you could start taking care of your party’s?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at January 24, 2006 10:36 AM
Comment #116196

AP:

‘The article discusses how Democrats are actually investigated by the House Ethics committee more often than Republicans are’

Umm… Is it because Republicans control the House Ethics Committee and refuse to investigate their fellow Republicans? JBOD, the committee even passed on investigating Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham.

Posted by American Pundit at January 24, 2006 10:20 AM

Umm… no its not, and you’d know that if you had taken the time to read the article BEFORE responding to it. You see, the article refers to investigations all the way back into the 1800’s, providing a historical reference, rather than your knee-jerk ‘it must be the Bush administration’s fault’ response.

If you wish to have informed discussion, might I suggest that you inform yourself first. It will save me the time of having to do it retroactively for you.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at January 24, 2006 11:12 AM
Comment #116197

“Nobody’s defending the tire slashing. What’s laughable is how blinded by hate the right wing is, to the point that they see crackpot conspiracies everywhere”

Conspiracies like Bush being a racist and allowing blacks to die during Katrina?

I agree with Stephen, instead of hounding the Reps for their problems, maybe you guys should start taking care of your own problems first.
Maybe then, your complaints will be looked at as having some credibility.

Posted by: kctim at January 24, 2006 11:13 AM
Comment #116200

AP:

Additionally, the article, and my point in presenting it, was to show the reason why Republicans get angry about the way the media presents things. You can feel free to disagree with the article, but you should at least read it before disagreeing, dont you think.

I presented it not to discuss the article, but rather to show a Republican perception. In that regard, it does not matter if the perception is accurate—that is a separate discussion. Democrats have their own perception of the world—some of their perceptions are accurate, others are inaccurate. Its simply important to understand the mindset of others in order to better understand their actions.

As far as the Ethics committees go, I’ve stated they should be outside the Congress. Doesn’t make any sense having the fox watching the henhouse, with no accountability. Hell, both parties decided to NOT level investigations against the other party—what does THAT tell the American people. I’m in favor of having some bi-partisan outside group of judges or whatever decide who to investigate, to run the investigations, and to enforce the rulings.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at January 24, 2006 11:22 AM
Comment #116207

Well it’s not usual that I come to watchblog for comedy but this just made me laugh uproariously. A republican complaining about election fraud of democrats while the republicans hold the house, senate and white house amid a bunch of election fraud allegations. Oh that’s rich! That’s not to say that the dems aren’t guilty (both parties definetly are), it’s just that the dems not as good at it as the pubbies are. This whole thing is silly and reminds me why I became independent, loyalty to the country before loyalty to a party.

But seriously, that was great Eric! What’s next? A republican column on democratic corruption? I can’t wait!

Posted by: chantico at January 24, 2006 11:42 AM
Comment #116212

Eric, joebagodonuts, kctim,

From the article Eric linked:

“Based on testimony given last year in the preliminary hearing, there is no eyewitness who can identify the men as the vandals. There is a security guard who says he saw someone scurrying in the dark, acting drunk and urinating on a wall. There are police and the Firestone representative, who are to testify about the damage found and the repairs required”

Not exactly a “smoking gun.”
If this story tuns out to be true then anyone involved should be held accountable.
You said your point was to demonstrate the Republican point of view as to what the media covers and does not cover. This is not a great example because 1) It was covered at the time it happened. 2) It’s pretty small potatos when taking into account all of the terrible things that happened and were said during the last two presidential elections.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at January 24, 2006 11:50 AM
Comment #116218

I really don’t think there is that much of a problem with the touch screen voting machines or the tabulation of votes. In the 2004 election I know of quite a few people personally that voted twice for Clinton of all people in past elections and were die hard Democrats. They all said they were voting for President Bush again. They considered the war against terror as the #1 issue and didn’t think Kerry would be able to deal with it. They all told me they was gonna vote for Bush so he would get the job done. If the Democrats keep trying to hurt the outcome of the next election by undercutting Bush’s War efforts, then in 2008 it doesn’t matter who the Democrats run as their candidates, they’ll lose again. They can’t keep on saying the War in Iraq can’t be won and expect to be taken serious. Everything has been on President Bush’s schedule with elections over there and the rebuilding continues. The polls don’t mean squat until that final day when they go in and vote. That’s the only poll that counts. And winning the war on Terrorism is what counts too, and their not gonna vote for somebody preaching defeat, they want somebody planning on a Victory. The only losers lately have been Democrats and that won’t change until they do.

Posted by: Gopher at January 24, 2006 11:55 AM
Comment #116219

Andre:

For clarification, I did not intend to use Eric’s example to demonstrate the Republican point of view as to what the media covers and does not cover. I used the link I provided to do that.

I’d agree that if they are found guilty, the vandals should be held accountable by law. If an investigation shows that it was done as a result of orders from higher up, then those higher up should be held accountable as well.

I’d agree also that its small potatoes. Where I see as a difference is that it would be considered larger potatoes by the media if it involved Republicans.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at January 24, 2006 11:55 AM
Comment #116221

Eric,

Thank you for the post. I had been meaning to buy a new pair of jeans, but now I have to, after peeing all over myself while laughing hysterically at your 4th grade logic.

And talk about length! Your diatribe just never ends. Hilarious! Please make your next column about how Republicans are way ahead of the curve on reforming lobbysit abuse, and how Democrats are the real ones to blame. I will probably break a rib laughing at that one — but with the sizable tax cut Dumbya gave you, you probably won’t mind paying my bill.

Posted by: 0% APR at January 24, 2006 11:59 AM
Comment #116224
If you wish to have informed discussion, might I suggest that you inform yourself first. It will save me the time of having to do it retroactively for you.

Sorry, JBOD. A survey of ethics violations in the 1800’s just doesn’t get me all excited. It saves me time to have you educate me on the esoterica. BTW, it still doesn’t surprise me because the Democratic Party’s been the dominant party since about 1800. It’s a numbers game.

I’m in favor of having some bi-partisan outside group of judges or whatever decide who to investigate, to run the investigations, and to enforce the rulings.

Who appoints the panel? :)

Posted by: American Pundit at January 24, 2006 12:15 PM
Comment #116228

“If this story tuns out to be true then anyone involved should be held accountable”

Andre
That is a standard line used by Reps on here but is often ignored.
“IF this story turns out to be true,” means waiting for the facts and letting justice be served based on those facts, not opinions and assumptions. That is how it should be and how BOTH sides determine guilt.

Posted by: kctim at January 24, 2006 12:17 PM
Comment #116241

AP:

Once again, I’d ask that you actually read the article prior to commenting on it. That way at least you’ll know what its about, so that you could comment accurately on it. Its always better to know what you are talking about than to have an ignorance of the subject matter. Well, at least I think so. You are free to agree or disagree with my thought process.

The article does not discuss a ” survey of ethics violations in the 1800’s”, but rather a comprehensive listing of all the investigated violations up to the present. See, now if you had just taken the time to read the article, you’d have known that. And you wouldn’t have been mistaken about the article for a second time. But the real point isn’t the article. The real point is simply to show what the perception of some Republicans is. I seem to be having a hard time getting that across to you—I hope its clear enough now, as I think its best to move along.

As far as who would appoint a bi-partisan committee—I don’t care, as long as its truly bi-partisan. Don’t know whether that can actually be accomplished, but I’d like to see it. In reality, you’d probably have to have the Congress appoint it, or at least vote to approve it, which leaves us that the majority party gets the majority vote in determining the makeup of such a committee.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at January 24, 2006 12:36 PM
Comment #116247

Did i just read that you babys brought up florida again? you know all the major news outlets went there to recount all the votes, And you do know that bush actually got more votes. I wonder if you beloved liberal news is running to uncover this election dealings. No probally not….Well atleast you liberals have John Kerry to guide you to the promise land, You know HELL!!

Posted by: Philipz at January 24, 2006 12:49 PM
Comment #116248
so where’s the news media?! Posted by Eric Simonson at January 24, 2006 02:53 AM
It’s more like “Where’s the shrink?” Posted by: Dave at January 24, 2006 12:49 PM
Comment #116266

Eric,
Don’t you know that if Republicans pull dirty tricks it a National Scandal. But when the Democrats do the same thing it’s just business as usuall?
Fact is BOTH parties are full of courption. And BOTH parties need to be thrown out of office.
I’d like to know where the so called right wing national media is on this too. Reckon they aint as right wing as the Liberals claim.

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 24, 2006 1:00 PM
Comment #116286

Ron, you’re right.

It’s amazing you never see Democrat’s outraged over their own corruption - or Republicans for theirs.

It’s time we all get outraged over ANY corruption - whether by Republicans OR Democrats.

We deserve politicians we can trust - and if we keep throwing out the corrupt ones, then we may, someday, end up with ones who put the Nation first.

Posted by: mac6115cd at January 24, 2006 1:53 PM
Comment #116288

This has a lot to do with the media template. I noticed in some of the comments from the left a certain incredulousness that Republicans would be so bold as to accuses Democrats. I think that they are sincere, even when the facts don’t back them up. It does not fit the template.

When you boil down to actual fact, Democrats are more likely to be involved in voting fraud etc than Republicans. For all the sound and fury about Florida and Ohio almost nothing came of it. Yet in Milwaukee and nearby areas we have cases of actual illegal acts and I am not only talking about the cars. In the election before that Gore operatives gave cigarettes and money to homeless people to vote Democratic or signing up entire nursing homes full of Alzheimer’s patients to send in absentee ballots.

Why don’t these things make a bigger splash? Because they don’t fit the template. Journalists accept all kinds of bogus stories about minority disenfranchisement because it fits the template. They know how to write those kinds of stories. Republicans being the victims of voter fraud just doesn’t make it.

That is why Republicans have to win by decent margins, because if it is not close Democrats antics can’t swing the election.

Posted by: Jack at January 24, 2006 1:58 PM
Comment #116308

Why does everything have to degrade into partisan rhetoric? I did a post on this subject in the blue column called “Read What Your Signing; You May Be Signing Your Rights Away”, and I did it without pointing fingers at either side. We have a PROBLEM that needs to be fixed! I don’t care who did it, now or in the past. My question is how are we going to prevent it in the future? As Jack Murtha said, It is very frustrating when legitimate concerns are raised and you get a rhetoric answer in response instead of a substantive answer.

Posted by: JayJay Snowman at January 24, 2006 3:20 PM
Comment #116312
But seriously, that was great Eric! What’s next? A republican column on democratic corruption? I can’t wait!

In the works, friend, in the works. If I make it funnier would you hit the tipjar?

Posted by: esimonson at January 24, 2006 3:39 PM
Comment #116343

Elephant Shit.
Neocon-Straussian nonsense.
That is what this article is.

You see the Neocons, who adhere to the philosophy of Leo Strauss believe that “The Greatest Clarity is a Contradiction”.

This article follows that nonsensical principle to the letter.
The writer (who I strongly suspect is being paid by the Neocons to write his ongoing nonsensical articles to this blog) brings up a small molehill of an incident to heap blame upon the entire Democratic Party where it doesn’t generally belong, in order to throw the “uneducated, unenlightened, unwashed masses who aren’t members of their elite” (for this is how the Neocon-Straussian’s view the vast majority of Americans) off the scent of their stinking mountain of secrecy, deception and lies.

What better way than Contradiction to keep the lowly hordes from discovering the equally large mountain of facts, findings and investigatons, and solid evidence that has accumulated regarding the Neocons obviously rigged and stolen elections?
That’s right, I said RIGGED and STOLEN ELECTIONS.
Because you see, to the Neocon-Straussian’s, whatever utterly immoral method they use to attain and hold power is always perfectly okay. Indeed, their whole principle can be neatly boiled down and reduced to one simple idea:
TAKE CONTROL AT ANY PRICE. KEEP CONTROL AT ANY PRICE.

Total nonsense, “Noble Lies”, and Contradictions of all sorts are more than fine, in fact they are considered absolutely necessary by this group. According to Strauss and his followers, the end (ultimate power) always justifies the means (lies, nonsense, dissolute conduct, total corruption, complete lawlessness).

Strauss: “It would be absurd to hamper the free flow of wisdom by any regulation, hence the rule of the wise must be absolute rule. It would be equally absurd to hamper the free flow of wisdom by the consideration of the unwise wishes of the unwise; hence the wise rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects.”

Everything that the Imperial Bushco regime and their minions in Congress have done during the past five, going on six years has been true to this despotic quote — including the past two presidential elections.
While they like to think of themselves in the role of the wise (rather than the most radical and unwise of men that they so clearly and obviously are), the American people for the most part, save for a certain percentage of sheep-like followers, have come to realize that this way of thinking is NOT AMERICAN — because it ignores our belief in the rule of law.
Not American, because Americans believe that “All Men Are Created Equal”.
Not American, because is not Conservative, nor is it Liberal.
Not American, because it is not Republican or Democrat, or anything remotely in between.
Not American, because it is not remotely indicative of our Republic, which is a Representative Democracy.
Not American, because instead, what the Neocons truly believe in is TYRANNY, run by a TYRANNICAL ELITE. And they are comprised of FOOLISH AND DANGEROUS PEOPLE who will STOOP TO ANYTHING and call it JUSTIFIED, BREAK EVERY LAW and claim it LAWFUL, and DISCARD OUR CONSTITUTION because it lies in complete opposition to EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEIR AGENDAS.

Like I said: Elephant Shit — massive stinking piles of it.

Suggested reading (pdf): Leo Strauss, George Bush and the Philosophy of Mass Deception

Posted by: Adrienne at January 24, 2006 4:27 PM
Comment #116354

“only” 10,000 votes, eh? Wasn’t the 2000 election decided by 500 votes?

I certainly hope the appropriate people are punished, but no one was directly stripped of their voting rights by the tire slashing. This is quite unlike what happened in Florida in 2000, when people were prevented from voting because they were Black and had a name similar to that of a felon.

So yes, the slashers belong in jail, along with Katherine Harris.

Posted by: Woody Mena at January 24, 2006 4:50 PM
Comment #116358

Also, in my town* the Republican mayor’s house was just egged by hooligans. The democrats in my town say it is just coincidence that Clinton just happened to be in a train that passed through.

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE? WHERE IS THE LIBERAL MEDIA ON THIS ONE??????!!!!!!

* Town and egging do not really exist. Do not call Rush Limbaugh. Do not alert the FBI.

Posted by: Max at January 24, 2006 5:00 PM
Comment #116368

Everyone on both sides should apply a little psychological theory, and realize you deny your own shadow by projecting on the “other” outside of you. Trying to prove who is worse or better is less than useless on every level. Own your shadow, and only then will we find a common path out of this narcissistic shouting match.

Posted by: Jonathan at January 24, 2006 5:09 PM
Comment #116371

Gee, I don’t know. Would this count as election fraud? Seems to me folks should have the truth on which to judge the candidates and illegal suppression of the truth constitutes fraud. It seems to me Ohio had something to do with the outcome of the 2004 race, too.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at January 24, 2006 5:13 PM
Comment #116373
so wheres the news media?!

Here is a report from NPR:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4465959

USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-24-tires-slashed_x.htm

FOX:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145254,00.html


You have the Chicago Tribune above. I bet it was in the Wall Street Journal too.

So, what was your point again?

Posted by: Woody Mena at January 24, 2006 5:16 PM
Comment #116375
so wheres the news media?!

Here is a report from NPR:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4465959

USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-24-tires-slashed_x.htm

FOX:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,145254,00.html


You have the Chicago Tribune above. I bet it was in the Wall Street Journal too.

So, what was your point again?

Posted by: Woody Mena at January 24, 2006 5:18 PM
Comment #116384

Adrienne,

I love your response. Unfortunately, ‘the man’ is busy keeping me down right now. I can’t wait to read the pdf though!

Posted by: esimonson at January 24, 2006 5:37 PM
Comment #116410

Why don’t people believe the Republicans? It’s simple. The shit has hit the fan hard for them, and their first response is to throw some feces back at their opponents. It’s a virtual concession of the misconduct, one that ensures that all that filth remains stuck. In the long run, exercises like this in moral equivalency, in pretending that the Democrats were anymore than peripherally involved in this are a losing strategy.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at January 24, 2006 6:37 PM
Comment #116413

esimonson:
“I love your response.”

That’s nice. I’m not interested in yours — they’re all the same.

“Unfortunately, ‘the man’ is busy keeping me down right now.”

“Hard Work!”, eh?

“I can’t wait to read the pdf though!”

Yeah, you know what you can do with it too…

Posted by: Adrienne at January 24, 2006 6:39 PM
Comment #116458

Just to let you know it has already been PROVEN by repeated demonstrations that DieBold Voting Machines could be hacked easily without leaving any traces. There is little question what happened on Election Day.

Posted by: Aldous at January 24, 2006 8:59 PM
Comment #116461

Aldous

It has been proven to your satisfaction that the machines can be hacked. Of course it would also be proven to your satisfaction that ballot boxes can be stuffed (since they can). You then jump to the conclusion that because they can be hacked they were hacked. From there you jump to because they can be hacked, they were hacked to they were hacked without the Democrats being able to see it. Then to they were hacked to the extent to throw the election. Then to the conclusion that it was enough to give the election to George Bush.

I string of conditional probabilities has about a zero chance of being true, but you are right that the possibility has been proven.

Some good advice: if someone offers to sell you a bridge or a handful of magic beans, don’t do it.

Once again, however, you flatter us Republicans. A few of us can trick scores of Dems without leaving a trace. I guess maybe the election is based on total IQ points.

Posted by: Jack at January 24, 2006 9:36 PM
Comment #116478

People are aghast at the constant drumbeat of Republican scandals and as a result, support for the Republicans is disappearing like the water out of a toilet. And what’s the Republican reaction?

1. They claim that their own scandals are nothing more than “politics as usual”, which is transparent bullshit.
2. They fall back on their usual tactic of sliming their opponents.

No wonder so many Americans disapprove of the Republicans. Keep up the counterproductive ad-hominem attacks, Eric. You’re diving more and more people into the waiting arms of the Dems.

Posted by: ElliottBay at January 24, 2006 10:23 PM
Comment #116479

Jack-
You are right to be skeptical that the election was won that way. I’m that way too, unless concrete evidence shows up. The problem is that you folks are less interested in actively pursuing better standards than you are in fending off political attack.

It shows up far too often, and eventually, if not pretty soon, it will set you up for your downfall. Politics is a derived study, and perceptions in the center of power for any organization can drift away from its realities.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at January 24, 2006 10:28 PM
Comment #116482

Eric,

Thanks for showing again why support for the Right is dropping so fast. The Right becomes involved in more and more scandals and their reaction, instead of cleaning their own house, is to try to poison the political atmosphere even more. A right-wing death spiral, and deservedly so.

Posted by: ElliottBay at January 24, 2006 10:46 PM
Comment #116490

Jack:

Actually, the Election is based on how corrupt DieBold is and how desperate the Republicans are.

You still have not explained the voting irregularities which were proven fact.

Posted by: Aldous at January 24, 2006 11:09 PM
Comment #116501

Aldous

I have explained to you many times that elections are statistical. There are some irregularities always and some things that look irregular but are not. There are not proven facts about anything that could have changed the results. If you want to argue that elections are not perfect you win. That is true of any election anywhere. If you want to say there was systematic abuse, you are with the tin foil cap crowd.

But if I we were to take your logic to its conclusion, why do you even bother complaining. It is obvious that if what you say is true, Republicans are so much smarter and sneakier that you have no chance.

Of course you don’t believe that, even if you think you do. It is just like all the people who claim they fear to speak out speaking out.

Stephen

You make a reasonable point, but the attacks we are fending off are not reasonable. I was a vote monitor. All sorts of funny things happen, but they are not nefarious. What has happened recently is that some people have set an impossible and even undesirable standard for elections. We will never be able to count every vote, much less ensure that everyone successfully votes. Some people will always make mistakes no matter how simple the process. And some people will just make mistakes. After I post this note, I will find several typos. Those will be mistakes. We all make them. And there is simple error. If you count a very large number of things several times, you will come up with a different total each time. The differences will be statistical.

An election is statistical. That is why we have such trouble when they are very close. The election of 2000 was very close - a statistical tie. The election of 2004 was not. Bush clearly won.

Posted by: Jack at January 24, 2006 11:37 PM
Comment #116512

Personally, I find it astounding that dem’s and rep’s here (more or less) simply repeat the same worn, reprehensible ‘arguments’ of their political counterparts… in essence, claiming what exactly?… ‘at least we’re not as bad as they are!’ - or is it merely, ‘well, they’re bad too!’

And you actually expect different results? A very select few democrats and republicans are actually discussing real, substantial change - and their solicitous cries for reform are usurped by incessant, ineffectual finger-pointing. I think we can now all agree that corruption has predominately permeated both parties (forgive the alliteration).

This in evidence (as it most assuredly is), perhaps we might put aside our partisan bickering at least long enough to rectify the underlying problems? After the chaos subsides, we can resume our attacks on our elected officials’ …indiscretions… Rest assured, if I had politicians whom I considered to be representing me, I would make it a priority to contact them on this matter.

Posted by: Diogenes at January 25, 2006 12:20 AM
Comment #116526

Everyone,

For those that have been at this blog for the past
how ever many hours, reread all the text. At the
upper echealons of both parties they believe us to
be pawns. We get all bent out of shape. Insult and blame. And, worst of all, get wrapped up in the “hating.” I myself am a conservative. BUT, I
am not a racist, bigoted, homophobe hatemonger.
WE are all individuals. WE have certain beliefs
that others are bound top disagree with. THAT is
what makes this country the best place on Earth
to live. Most other countries, you differ from the
state line, your brain has suddenly become the
new residence of a cheap bullet.

Power corrupts folks. Cant be denied. WE send these people to the state capitals and to Washing-
ton. Our system of government is crazy sometimes.
But, when I look at other places in the world where citizens live in utter fear of their gov’t,
I am profoundly glad I was born in the USA, live
in the USA, and will die in the USA. Our predecessors laid out our form of gov’t. If it needs some changes, it is up to US to fix it.

Tks for lettin me ramble….

Posted by: madness at January 25, 2006 1:14 AM
Comment #116551

Diogenes:
“This in evidence (as it most assuredly is), perhaps we might put aside our partisan bickering at least long enough to rectify the underlying problems? After the chaos subsides, we can resume our attacks on our elected officials’ …indiscretions… “

But that is the whole problem. The Republicans DON”T WANT to rectify the underlying problems with our elections. They’ve blocked everything that might bring about real, accountable election reform. This is not just partisan bickering (on my part anyway). This conspicuous and indisputable fact is just one of the many reasons I now feel free to claim that the past election was rigged and stolen by the GOP in Ohio, 2004.
If they had ever once displayed even some paltry bit of concern regarding this issue, I’d might still be calling 2004 a question mark. But not now. Not with the recent Diebold revelations, which proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it took only one person with the desire to change votes, to do so. And when that fact is combined with all the many, many problems and strange anomalies that occurred, it seems not only probable and logical, but quite undeniable.

There was Diebold’s (now former) CEO Wally O’Dell the dedicated GOP supporter who hosted a $10,000-a-plate fundraiser for Bush in his mansion before the election, and whose infamous internal memo assured his party that he was “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President next year”.

Additionally, there is Kenneth Blackwell. Everything that man did before the election in Ohio was highly suspicious — even when we leave aside the outrageous fact that he served simultaneously as both Ohio’s Chief Elections Officer and as the co-chair of the Committee to Re-elect George Bush.
Such as the fact that Blackwell strictly enforced a rule that required voter registration cards to be printed on a certain weight of paper, thereby making everyone who registered with the “wrong thickness” have to register again. He also suddenly announced before the election that, anyone who appeared at a polling place to vote but whose registrations could not be confirmed would only be given provisional ballots — and then only if they applied for a provisional ballot in the correct precinct (many people who called the elections office for that info were somehow mysteriously directed to the wrong precincts).
These particular incidents caused a U.S. District Court judge who heard many of the complaints regarding Blackwell’s decisions on provisional ballots to reject his new policies. The judge stated at the time: “Blackwell apparently seeks to accomplish the same result in Ohio in 2004 that occurred in Florida in 2000.”
(Btw, Blackwell later appealed that decision with the 6th Circuit US Court of Appeals, who then reversed the District Court decision. It seems that it helps to have friends in high places.)
In addition to all the exclusionary and arbitrary changes in provisional ballot procedures and how they were to be counted, we can also thank Blackwell for all of those uneven voting machine allocations (less machines in Democratic precincts only), and for completely failing to process many, many new voter registrations before the election.

There were also the exit polls that were taken, which CANNOT in any way be satisfactorily explained regarding the 2004 election, or in the 2005 referenda election which followed in Ohio.

There is simply just too much that has been seriously goingWrong in Ohio’s elections.
Too much that has gone in the GOP’s favor, and too many across the board election reform ideas proposed which they’ve then willfully and observably ignored.

To be continued, due to number of links…

Posted by: Adrienne at January 25, 2006 4:29 AM
Comment #116552

This is why I now feel no hesitancy in stating it plainly: The Republicans rigged and stole the last election — just like they rigged and stole the election in 2000 in the State of Florida.

Posted by: Adrienne at January 25, 2006 4:31 AM
Comment #116553

FYI, the American Center for Voting Rights lists areas of highest perceived voter fraud, Dem vs. Rep and Rep vs. Dem charges & counter charges, and general observations of “voting irregularities”. Their Vote Fraud, Intimidation & Suppression In The 2004 Presidential Election report is at http://www.ac4vr.com/reports/072005/default.html


A quick perusal found gems including:
· …and an Ohio court order stopping Democrat operatives from calling voters telling them the wrong date for the election and faulty polling place information.” (I am further surprised this continued after it was discovered — why could it not be stopped without a court order — can’t everyone admit this is wrong?)
· Perhaps the most outrageous example of voter registration fraud occurred in Defiance County, where Chad Staton pled guilty to submitting hundreds of fraudulent voter registration forms for the Democrat National Voter Fund in exchange for crack cocaine. Mr. Staton filled out and submitted voter registration forms in … Lucas, Cuyahoga and other counties. Mr. Staton provided a taped admission regarding these crimes, was indicted and subsequently pled guilty. Mr. Staton admitted being paid for his efforts in crack cocaine by a Democrat National Voter Fund employee, Georgianna Pitts. Ms. Pitts, a Toledo native, was reported to be an employee of the Democrats and paid Mr. Staton with crack cocaine for the falsified forms. … Sheriff Westrick was able to trace the falsified registration forms and learned that they were submitted to the Cuyahoga County Board by a Voter Protection Project, located in Cleveland, Ohio.
· Did you know that “Sowande Ajumoke Omodunde (a.k.a “Supreme Solar Allah”)” [apparently his legal name] is, according to this site, the son of a US Congresswoman(D) from Wisconsin? Just possibly an example of poor parenting… Yes, our Supreme Solar Allah committed violent crimes subverting the ‘04 election.

Posted by: Brian at January 25, 2006 4:32 AM
Comment #116560

Well the Bush campaingn workers answered Wisconsin’s fraud (if true) with their fraud in Ohio.

Posted by: earjoy at January 25, 2006 5:52 AM
Comment #116561

Well the Bush campaingn workers answered Wisconsin’s fraud (if true) with their own fraud in Ohio.

Posted by: earjoy at January 25, 2006 5:53 AM
Comment #116603

Brian:

def’n: perusal
To read or examine, typically with great care

Perhaps “quick”, most likely not “perusal”.
Your post should have read “3 unlinked rants” ? As I couldn’t find them in my cursory swim through the ac4vr site.

Posted by: Dave at January 25, 2006 9:01 AM
Comment #116605

An interestingarticle. The author found seventy actual congressional records of corruption over the last 30 years. Of those, only fifteen were Republican.

That means a little less the FOUR TIMES AS MANY DEMOCRATS were overcome by temptation.

Maybe the media reports less on Dem corruption because it is not news. When something becomes common, it stops making headlines.

Posted by: Jack at January 25, 2006 9:13 AM
Comment #116606

Tire-slashing trial to begin
National scrutiny returns for 5 accused of waylaying GOP-rented cars
By DERRICK NUNNALLY
dnunnally@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Jan. 8, 2006
Fourteen months after President George W. Bush was re-elected without carrying Wisconsin, five men who worked for the Kerry-Edwards campaign, including the sons of two prominent Milwaukee politicians, go on trial today on felony counts of vandalism in the tire-slashing of more than 20 vehicles rented by Republican campaigners.

Election Day Vandalism
Five Charged


Lewis G. Caldwell


Justin Howell


Lavelle Mohammad


Sowande A. Omokunde


Michael Pratt

Recent Coverage
7/18/05: 5 to be tried early next year in election day tire-slashing
3/4/05: Trial set in tire slashings
2/15/05: 5 must stand trial in tire-slashing
2/1/05: GOP van case to be continued
1/24/05: 5 charged in GOP tire slashings


The incident, and the felony charges filed two months later, drew Milwaukee national attention from political partisans, against a backdrop of allegations of election fraud in the city. Only a handful of criminal charges of election fraud have been filed, and U.S. Attorney Steven M. Biskupic has said that no evidence of a conspiracy has been discovered despite an extensive investigation.

Yet the arrival of the tire-slashing trial in another election year could again draw scrutiny to the state of politics in Milwaukee.

Cable network Court TV is covering the trial, which, with five defendants being tried together, is expected to last two weeks. The witness list includes national AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), as well as 77 others, including political operatives from both major parties, FBI agents, Milwaukee police officers and a representative of a Firestone tire center.

Not all of them are certain to be called into Circuit Judge Michael B. Brennan’s courtroom. A spokesman for Jackson’s office said Friday that the office had not received a subpoena or other official notification that Jackson, who was in Milwaukee for Election Day 2004 and may have spoken with some parties involved in the case, would be required to testify.

Plenty of possible jurors
What apparently will be required is dozens more potential jurors than usual for a criminal trial’s jury pool. Brennan would not say how large the jury pool assembled today will be. However, his courtroom, which has two jury boxes, had signs on half of its gallery seats Friday afternoon reserving them for Monday’s jury pool, which appeared to create seating space for more than 70 potential jurors in the room at once.

“One of the problems is going to be finding people who are willing to give up two weeks of their life to sit for a trial,” said Rodney Cubbie, defense attorney for Michael Pratt, son of former acting Mayor Marvin Pratt.

Cubbie’s client, and the other four men charged in the case - Sowande Omokunde, the son of U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore of Milwaukee; Lewis G. Caldwell; Lavelle Mohammad; and Justin Howell -face up to 3 1/2 years in prison and a $10,000 fine if convicted of felony property damage in the case.

The trial will ultimately turn on whether Assistant District Attorney David Feiss can tie the five men to $4,192.35 in tire damage, plus $1,125 in towing charges, inflicted outside Republican Party headquarters on W. Capitol Drive in the pre-dawn hours of Nov. 2, 2004.

Based on testimony given last year in the preliminary hearing, there is no eyewitness who can identify the men as the vandals. There is a security guard who says he saw someone scurrying in the dark, acting drunk and urinating on a wall. There are police and the Firestone representative, who are to testify about the damage found and the repairs required.

Then there is the bulk of the alleged link between the defendants and the slashed tires: their purported statements in the weeks before the election about planning hijinks on GOP headquarters dubbed “Operation Elephant Takeover” and what they were heard saying after they returned to Democratic Party headquarters about the same time as the police say the tires were cut.

Four of the five men - all but Howell - are quoted by others in the criminal complaint as saying they took part. Howell’s attorney, Jeffrey Purnell, said the evidence against his client “does look like it’s different” than the cases against the other four defendants, but he declined to say whether Howell has been offered a deal to get out of the charges.

“It looks like he shouldn’t be here,” Purnell said.

Posted by: Lynne at January 25, 2006 9:14 AM
Comment #116674

Adrienne

Thanks for the link to the Steven Freeman paper on exit polls. It is a stunning piece of work. It is hard to argue that someone wasn’t messing with the results in multiple states. I think there is a good rationale why the Bush campaign would do so, rather than just focus on the one or two states they needed for the electoral college win. They feared another such win without a popular majority. They felt for legitimacy they needed a majority, because the catcalls from the losers in 2000 stung them and Bush’s claims of a mandate just sounded stupid.

How they accomplished it is still a question. As Jack points out, these voting errors are usually just random noise, and the size of the electorate ensures that the central limit theorem comes into play and the right person wins. To create mischief, one must push the odds in the house’s favor, the house being the party you want to win. It is clear that a variety of tactics had to be used and on a large enough scale to overcome the usual penny ante stuff that happens.

Now, this could all be fantasy on my, your, and Steve Freeman’s part. In any case, though, I would have expected a thorough investigation into the discrepancies, especially because of the anecdotal evidence of tampering here and there that goes beyond the usual stuff. The irony of Eric’s screed is that Wisconsin was the ONLY battleground state in which there was no discrepancy between exit polls and actual results.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at January 25, 2006 1:40 PM
Comment #116688

Jack, Jack, Jack

Your “article,” by the well respected fair and balanced Washington Times, gives two pieces of “evidence” for Democratics moral failings: 1) anecdotes of Democrats’ (by and large small fry) stories on back pages compared to front page reports on Republicans (generally big fry), and 2) this spurious count of House ethics committee investigations (not convictions) in the last 30 years. The former “evidence” is not even worthy of address, since it is anecdote, and not representative but selected by the author. In regard to the second, the author fails to note the rather salient detail that almost all of those “ethics violations” occurred during the GOP reign and that they have a demonstrated reluctance to go after their own, as demonstrated by their near refusal to do anything about Delay’s stuff without huge public pressure. Not exactly a reliable way to tabulate misdeeds by party affiliation.

So, Jack, next time you pick up some fact-based, unimpeachable argument like this, take a deep breath, read it over again, and see if you really want to ride that horse all the way over to this blog. ‘Nkay?

Posted by: Mental Wimp at January 25, 2006 2:30 PM
Comment #116702

We have all argued Florida into the ground over the last 5 years.
But consider this from ‘04:

Immediately prior to the elections, a poll came out showing what the voting patterns in Ohio were likely to be. They showed where the supporters of Kerry lived and where the supporters of Bush lived. The CEO of DIEBOLD Inc., an outspoken supporter of Bush who had openly stated he considered it his job to “Deliver the election to Bush,” had voting machines re-arranged and transported from district to district in such a way that in suburban GOP districts, there were so many machines to voteres that the lines were often no more than two or three deep and voting took minutes. Meanwhile, in the city of Cincinatti, heavily democratic districts had working machines removed so that they had lines backed up for blocks and working class people had to lose an entire day of work in order to vote. They were reduced to two or three machines to serve thousands of voters, while the GOP areas had dozens of machines to serve hundreds.

You simply don’t have a leg to stand on when you try to refute the GOP steals elections. Your accusation thus smacks of retribution rather than TRUTH.

This is an election year. TRUTH and HONOR are ALREADY playing a huge roll. I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but…
You are doing those of us on the left of the political spectrum a mighty favor by portraying yourself and your arguments with the tone and in the light that you do. Keep it up. We thank you. The Nation thanks you. The Founding Fathers who built this country and wrote our constitution thank you.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at January 25, 2006 3:24 PM
Comment #116718

Perhaps we’d all better do something to soon to stop this election fraud, while we’re still able to vote, to peacefully force government to be responsible and accountable too?

Why has so much election fraud gone unpunished ?

What good are laws if they are not enforced ?

If this election fraud continues, elections won’t matter, and we will have lost our last valuable mechanism needed to peacefully force government to be responsible and accountable too.

It does not matter which party is doing it more than the other. They both do it. The lack of (or selective) law enforcement to enforce laws and protect against election fraud is indicative of a much deeper problem.

Election reform, and many other reforms are needed, but none of it will be possible until we first address the core problem, and do some major house cleaning.

Government is supposed to protect the rights of its citizens and provide for the National Defense.

Is it doing that good enough ?
Why not ?
If you think it is bad now, just wait.
If the root problem and the nations pressing problems continue to be ignored, voting may be the least of our worries.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 25, 2006 4:00 PM
Comment #116721

ERIC SIMONSON,

WELL YEAH but do you know how many cars I had to slash the tires of before I got the right one—jeesh…Took all afternoon.

What this is about obviously has to do originally with dirty trixters in the South, nominally republican as far back as the 60’s. Where they had slashed the tires of transport vans for urban black neighborhoods and for the elderly in low income areas—it’s a legend in election tactics and tricks more or less. I say all’s fair in politics and there actually are far worse tactics—like um hep-hemm Diebold blackbox voting.

So Eric, dear opponent these are the stories we tell of the way things were—help keep legend legend.

Posted by: Anonymous at January 25, 2006 4:08 PM
Comment #116730

I believe this is certainly as good as all those baseless accusation from Ohio and Florida, or the Diebolt fairy tale.

The things I mentioned are a matter of congressional record. If you look at the actual document, you see that Republicans often went after their own. Beyond that, for most of the last thirty years Democrats have controlled the House. And Rep. William Jefferson, Louisiana Democrat, plead guilty to bribing the congressman. I don’t think anyone made that up. The source of the article means nothing in this case. You can attack the author, but not the facts.

And anonymous

Back in the 1960s and during the Jim Crow era, the south was solidly Democratic. So maybe your legends are just that - legends or maybe they are about Democrats.

Posted by: Jack at January 25, 2006 4:37 PM
Comment #116732

Jack

I don’t think I attacked the source, only implied that it typically leaned in a particular direction. I think I supplied evidence that it did so in this instance. The anecdotes were skewed and the blatant differences even in those selected were ignored by the author. If you go to the source of the “statistics” (the committee website), as I did, you’ll see that most of the incidents happened during the Republic reign and so the observation that most of the charges were against Democrats is vapid. The Republicans have been quite open about only reluctantly investigating allegations against Republicans, and only do so when there is a public outcry (remember what it took to get action against Delay?). They are very much more ready to investigate Democrats. I know you read the news (other than Republican house organs, that is) so why pretend?

Posted by: Mental Wimp at January 25, 2006 4:44 PM
Comment #116749

—Jack, during those times yes they were Democratic and it is an old trick. but during the eighties and nineties such tricks became the lore of activities of the Republicans (such is claimed) but reallistically if you look back in history you’ll find cases of people running out of polling places with the ballot box and such. there are loads of such cases of dirty tricks throughout our election history.

How about the hat trick of counting the dead from local graveyards as having voted???

Posted by: Anonymous at January 25, 2006 5:54 PM
Comment #116775

Jack:

What you said about the South being Democratic in the 60’s makes sense. After the Civil Rights Movement, all those Racist Cheating Pigs must have switched to the Republican Side.

Posted by: Aldous at January 25, 2006 8:13 PM
Comment #116786
Once again, I’d ask that you actually read the article prior to commenting on it. That way at least you’ll know what its about, so that you could comment accurately on it. Its always better to know what you are talking about than to have an ignorance of the subject matter.

I’m pretty sure I said I didn’t have the time to read something like that, and that I’m relying on you to educate me. You’re not doing a very good job, JBOD. ;)

Posted by: American Pundit at January 25, 2006 9:22 PM
Comment #116793

Some off the cuff remarks.

Diebolt probably did not move voting machines at their whim. That is almost always controlled by the County/Parish election board.

I work at the polling stations in my county. I also have done exit polling for Edison/Mitofsky. There are generally 12-13 catagories to log for each person polled. There is also a “key question” concerning that particular election. Every 6-8 person is polled, depending whether it is a primary, general or special election. Some people just do not like to be invaded by somoeone asking questions on how they voted. This is true whenever there is a sharp difference in the cadidates. More could be said, but that is the basic layout of exit polling.

When working the actual voting area in my county in AZ, we by law had to account for every count, ballot, registration, etc. When the voting was closed, we would remove a module from the machine used to tabulate the vote. The module was sent my computer and modem to the central election headquarters. Hacking this arrangement would be extremely difficult.

Posted by: tomh at January 25, 2006 9:50 PM
Comment #116797

Let me see if I am reading this right. There is a HUGE fight over the appointment of Alito to the Supreme Court, the recently enacted Medicare “reform” is proving to be disastrous, Iraq looks like it will be a theological democracy and most of the news about the environment is that we are well into global warming (with records temps et al), and many scientists are saying we’re at the point of no return. Yet you guys are getting all heated up about something that happened over a year ago that had no real impact on the general election. What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted by: Tapia at January 25, 2006 9:58 PM
Comment #116799

The DIXIECRATS are now Republicans. They switched just as Strom Thurman did. Rick Perry of Texas was one of the younger of their number. He was once a Democrat. Look them up. It’s revealing. The same party of people is STILL committing the same kinds of horrendous corruption as always.

RGF

Posted by: RGF at January 25, 2006 10:02 PM
Comment #116803

Aldous et all

This is just a tangential remark about human beings and history.

We tend to project back from today to yesterday or from yesterday to today, as you did when you say that those racist pigs must have changed sides. No doubt some did. But this formulation is false.

People are born and people die. The civil rights movement was forty years ago. The median age in the U.S. is 35.3. Most of the people voting today were not eligible to vote (or were not even born) in those days.

I grew up with the words of Martin Luther King and as long as I can remember have believed that we should judge a people by the content of their characters rather than the color of their skins. I bet that is true of many people. We have no memory of anything else. We didn’t change sides. This has been our side.

The fact is that most people really don’t change their minds about their core beliefs. That is why change is generational. It is very likely that the racist democrats of the 1950s and 1960s lived and died without changing their minds or their party affiliation. (That is why it took a generation for the south to change.) Most of them are dead or in old folks homes, BTW. Any Republican under that age of sixty could not have been among them. Forty years is a long time ago. People don’t live forever.

Posted by: Jack at January 25, 2006 10:15 PM
Comment #116827

Since I’ve worked for the Board of Elections in the past in the stte of Ohio I have to say that that is BS about Diebold being able to move machines to surban districts. Each county has it’s own voting machines and it’s own Board of Elections, they(BoE) are the ones who make decisons about where voting machines go. It depends on how many machines the county can afford/are working and population about where exactly they go. One more thing….Counties from most of the state just started using Diebolds in 2005, not 2004! Approximatly 89% of the counties were still using paper ballots during the last Presidential election!LOL I know no one from my area who voted for Kerry, we couldn’t believe it was as close as it was.

Posted by: chris b at January 25, 2006 11:44 PM
Comment #116828

Tapia -

that is ostensibly the case… and i thought i was the only one to notice.

fyi, i even saw FOX news acknowledge global warming as a real and imminent danger recently - at the bottom in the news crawl, granted; but nevertheless, that was astounding coming from a network that thinks science is leftist-commi propaganda, not to mention heresy of the lowest denomination.

Posted by: Diogenes at January 25, 2006 11:48 PM
Comment #116834

I wondered over to the Free Republic site, just to read and learn. I didn’t learn much of anything, however. I did however manage to get myself banned this around 4 pm today - and apparently caused a major policy change. All I wanted to know was how they could have a “serous dicusion and learning expericene” if everyone agrees with each other. My question must’ve stir-up someone becasue I was imemdiately banned.

I simply asked them how they could be a “serious discussion site” if everyone agreed with each other. Boy did I cause an up-roar. I sent an e-mail but I doubt I’ll receive a response.

I also looked up “army of God” amd “Daily Kos”. I was banned from Free Repulic, scared and frightened by the army of god site, and bored to tears with the Daily Kos.

Any comments?

Posted by: Linda H. at January 26, 2006 12:30 AM
Comment #116835

Adrienne

Elephant Shit.
Neocon-Straussian nonsense.
That is what this article is.

Why do I get the feeling that if this was posted on the Blue side and was talking about Bush you’d be 100% in agreement with it?
But it;s in the Red collum and about Kerry so it’s ‘Elephant Shit’.

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 26, 2006 12:30 AM
Comment #116841

RGF,
You are pretty well on target when it comes to a definition of DIXIECRAT


Wikipedia’s definiton of DIXIECRAT
The term Dixiecrat is a portmanteau of Dixie, referring to the Southern United States, and Democrat, referring to the United States Democratic Party. Initially, it referred to a 1948 splinter from the party: for over a century, white Southerners had overwhelmingly been Democrats, but that year many bolted the party and supported Strom Thurmond’s third-party candidacy for president of the United States. Over the next several decades, as the white South slowly re-aligned from the Democrats to the Republicans, the term came to have a broader usage, including, for example, with reference to the members of the Electoral College who in the election of 1960 voted for Harry Flood Byrd rather than John F. Kennedy, or the white Southern voters and electors who in 1968 supported Wallace.

The term has also been used to refer to conservative white Southerners who remain within the Democratic Party, and those who were formerly Democrats but now identify as Republicans.

(Tagged November 2005)

Posted by: Linda H. at January 26, 2006 12:51 AM
Comment #116842

Eric,

Great article( as always).

From some of the comments it would appear that printing the truth as struck a nerve with some.

Posted by: Beagle at January 26, 2006 12:52 AM
Comment #116851

Eric,

Thanks for making the turth be known. May God bless you.

Cheers,
Jane

Posted by: jane at January 26, 2006 2:02 AM
Comment #116940

Beagle,
Elephant sh!t wrapped in rose paper is still elephant sh!t.

Ron,
As a Social-Liberal Fiscal-Conservative non-party aligned individual, I would never intentionally align myself with any liberal or Democrat who ranted with such total bogus crap as Eric’s posts. In the same way, anyone with a half a brain, half a soul, half a heart, or even half a sense-of-self would distance themselves from simonson’s insidious garbage.

Posted by: Dave at January 26, 2006 8:51 AM
Comment #116975

chris b:
“Since I’ve worked for the Board of Elections in the past in the stte of Ohio I have to say that that is BS about Diebold being able to move machines to surban districts.”

I never suggested that Diebold moved any machines. I said that Blackwell as the Chief Elections Officer for Ohio was responsible for the allocations of machines.

“Each county has it’s own voting machines and it’s own Board of Elections, they(BoE) are the ones who make decisons about where voting machines go. It depends on how many machines the county can afford/are working and population about where exactly they go.”

And Blackwell was supposed to make sure their requests, based on their decisions, were fulfilled. But did a horrendous job with that — especially for the Democrats.

“One more thing….Counties from most of the state just started using Diebolds in 2005, not 2004! Approximatly 89% of the counties were still using paper ballots during the last Presidential election!”

Yes, you’re right. Punch cards were primarily used, which were then fed into Diebold and ES&S (owned by Wally O’ Dell’s brother) scanners and fed into Diebold GEMS eletronic central tabulators. Which can be easily hacked by one person in mere minutes if someone wishes to change the vote. Had it not been for the uproar caused when the notorious O’Dell memo was uncovered, Diebold electronic voting machines might have been used.

“LOL I know no one from my area who voted for Kerry,”

Which means exactly nothing.

“we couldn’t believe it was as close as it was.”

Indeed. I still can’t believe how much went wrong and how much was engineered to make it a Bush win — neither could the Government Accountability Office, whose report confirmed key 2004 stolen election findings

PS to Mental Wimp, very glad I could share Freeman’s article with you. And very happy to know that someone actually looks at my links! :^)

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 10:43 AM
Comment #116979

“might have been used”

The saddest words Of tongue or pen Are these four words It might have been.

Dems are long on possibilities, short on concrete facts. I often go to the sites you mention. What I find is people like the Monty Python character claiming “She turned me into a newt” - “I got better.” I guess they believe it.

Actually the next stanza of the song quoted above fit your party well too.

We had big dreams
We made big plans
How could they slip
Right through our hands

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 10:59 AM
Comment #116984

Tapia:
“Let me see if I am reading this right. There is a HUGE fight over the appointment of Alito to the Supreme Court, the recently enacted Medicare “reform” is proving to be disastrous, Iraq looks like it will be a theological democracy and most of the news about the environment is that we are well into global warming (with records temps et al), and many scientists are saying we’re at the point of no return. Yet you guys are getting all heated up about something that happened over a year ago”

Something rotten and crooked that happened a year ago. Something which cause or made worse everything you just listed.

“that had no real impact on the general election.”

Diebold was instumental in casting or counting 80% of America’s vote in the last election. Huge Impact, horrifyingly real.

“What’s wrong with this picture?”

American Democracy undermined and subverted to the tyrannical will of the Neocon elite.

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 11:04 AM
Comment #116988

Jack,

Recently in a blue column thread Darren said these things about Republicans in general, and they apply so perfectly to your post, so I’m simply going to quote him as a reply to your last post:

“People wonder why the Republican Party is always being compared to the Nazis? Because the tactics are the same. Contempt for the oppostition, desire for a single party system and creating propoganda where you repeat lies enough until they are believed.”

“I have looked into the heart of the Republican party and there is a cancer… a soul sickness… one that is based on self-centered-righteousness, apathy and contempt for others. It caters to the lowest common denominators… greed, envy, hatred of anyone different.”

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 11:18 AM
Comment #117006

Jane:
“Thanks for making the turth be known.”

Yes, Eric always gives us the TURTH, rather than the TRUTH.

“May God bless you.”

The Grand Old Deity? I believe he might be on the payroll…

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 11:50 AM
Comment #117011

Ron,
As a Social-Liberal Fiscal-Conservative non-party aligned individual, I would never intentionally align myself with any liberal or Democrat who ranted with such total bogus crap as Eric’s posts. In the same way, anyone with a half a brain, half a soul, half a heart, or even half a sense-of-self would distance themselves from simonson’s insidious garbage.

Posted by: Dave at January 26, 2006 08:51 AM

Have you seen me agree with Eric in general? The only thing I agreed with him on is on where the mainstream press (the one that the Libs say is right wing) is on this. And why aint they all over this.
Is this piece any differant than the stuff being posted over on the Blue side?
This piece is just as partisan as the pieces over on the Blue side. And I don’t know how much is spin and how much is cold hard fact.
I feel the question I asked Adrienne is fair enough given how she’s comes off as being as partisan as Eric does.
Someone can comment on something without out totally supporting the views of the writer.
I’m still woundering why the so called right wing media aint all over this. Wether it fact or not. That hasn’t stopped them in the past.

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 26, 2006 11:55 AM
Comment #117012

Looks like my computer got into some left over egg nog again.

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 26, 2006 11:57 AM
Comment #117017

Ron,

Your level of agreement with Eric was not at issue nor was it even reffered to in my post. Your allegation that Adrienne would line up with any blue-side post was in my post and I thought that was unsupported (being nice). You simply assign “partisanship” to her strongly held and extremely well contstructed and consistent beliefs (I would call them liberal beliefs). I hesitate to speak for her but she strikes me as someone “less party, more issue”.
Also, What does this mean?:
“I’m still woundering why the so called right wing media aint all over this. Wether it fact or not. That hasn’t stopped them in the past.”

Summary: You dismiss her views as blindly Democratic without any basis in fact and imply that politics is all there is. You also wonder why the media isn’t reporting a load of bullsh!t for change?

Posted by: Dave at January 26, 2006 12:11 PM
Comment #117024

Ron:
“I feel the question I asked Adrienne is fair enough given how she’s comes off as being as partisan as Eric does.”

Ron, I can’t be labeled partisan. I’m not a Democrat any longer.
I write from my own viewpoint only. (Actually that’s how it always was when I still belonged to my former party — because people on the left never march in perfect lock-step on all the issues. And thank heavens for that!) If the Democrats moved themselves back toward the left rather than the center, I might consider rejoining them. But since they haven’t, I haven’t.
That being said, I am still an unapologetic Liberal thinker, and no doubt always will be.
Hope that clears things up.

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 12:24 PM
Comment #117027

Adrienne
I satnd corrected. And I still respet your views. Even if you are wrong. Ha!

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 26, 2006 12:29 PM
Comment #117028

Thanks for the compliment, and for watching my back Dave! :^x

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 12:30 PM
Comment #117031

That should be stand not satnd. My fingers move faster than my brain at times

Posted by: Ron Brown at January 26, 2006 12:32 PM
Comment #117068

after reading all these comments i tend to belive the liberals are just plain angry people with lots of hatred i,m not saying the conservatives are any better what i would like to say is (don,t belive every thing you hear to be fact) if you,re republican you tend to belive everything they say to be fact and if you,re democrat you tend to belive every thing they say to be fact stop and judge for you,re self listen to both sides and make you,re own decision. both parties have coruption, comments on this site should be at a profesional level.

Posted by: alan at January 26, 2006 1:45 PM
Comment #117107

‘liberal media’ is a misnomer, and i’m frankly tired of hearing it as a dismissal of every issue concerning republicans. labeling and condemning the source of a news story as partisan does not *automatically* invalidate the story.

I doubt very many moderates or independents (and obviously democrats) would consider FOX news anything but extremely conservative.

as for the others, in my estimation, they are generally socially quite liberal and economically equally conservative. there are a great many reasons for this if you stop and think about it.

Finally, i might remind you that these media sources are all owned by very wealthy people - these people are obviously mainly concerned with *surprise* - making money. Thus, they will spout out any worthless crap they think will get people’s attention, regardless of which party it names or shames… hence the expression, ‘if it bleeds, it leads’. As we have seen in congress, greed is nonpartisan.

Posted by: Diogenes at January 26, 2006 2:55 PM
Comment #117109

Adrienne

Adreinne

Only liberals could take a post principally consisting of quotations from Monty Python and Neil Diamond and find hate, Nazi tactics, greed envy etc. Maybe people really think that I mean to turn opponents into newts.

I do believe liberals just don’t have a well-developed sense of humor in the sense of being able to take the joke. For liberals humor consists of making fun of conservatives. Everything else, I guess, is hate speech.

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 2:55 PM
Comment #117159

Jack:
“Adrienne

Adreinne”

The former is the correct spelling.

“Only liberals could take a post principally consisting of quotations from Monty Python and Neil Diamond and find hate, Nazi tactics, greed envy etc. Maybe people really think that I mean to turn opponents into newts.”

The Nazi tactic was to say that the sites I linked to in my post to chris b weren’t from factual sources.
You wrote:
“Dems are long on possibilities, short on concrete facts. I often go to the sites you mention. What I find is people like the Monty Python character claiming “She turned me into a newt” - “I got better.” I guess they believe it.”

Yes, I believe it. Because the the first link I gave was a copy of an article that appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer newspaper. The second link had in it’s second paragraph a link to the Government Accountability Office report, so your attempted smear was indeed an uncalled for Nazi-style tactic.

“I do believe liberals just don�t have a well-developed sense of humor in the sense of being able to take the joke.”

Oh I think liberals generally have a very well-developed sense of humor. We also have a very well developed sense of when we’re only receiving mean-spirited, grossly unfair jabs.

“For liberals humor consists of making fun of conservatives. Everything else, I guess, is hate speech.”

Oh sure. And what category of humor does this little poem fall under for you conservatives?:

“We had big dreams
We made big plans
How could they slip
Right through our hands”

In the same spirit, here’s one for the Neocons:

We have big schemes
And no ethical mores
We’re fond of acting
Like shameless whores

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 4:27 PM
Comment #117191

Adrienne

Just look at what you have written and compare it to what I wrote that seems to upset you so much. I called nobody any names. I did question the sources you use, just as mine have been questioned on many occasions.

Your link about the government accountability office was actually a link to an article that extrapolated from the report and you extrapolated from the extrapolation. The actual report said that it found some potential problems with the machines. It did not say that it found any actual problems and it certainly did not imply that the election was stolen. I hardly think questioning your sources is a Nazi tactic, especially when you misuse them. In fact, what I said did not go far enough in that the source was long on possibilities and specifically provided NO concrete instances.

I once wrote a whole article based on a factcheck.org article that concluded that the President didn’t lie (i.e. he believed what he told us) about Iraq and many people attacked factcheck.org because it disagreed with their prejudice. Factcheck.org is is usually praised as a neutral source.

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 5:13 PM
Comment #117216

Jack:
“Your link about the government accountability office was actually a link to an article that extrapolated from the report and you extrapolated from the extrapolation.”

Bullshit. I extrapolated nothing, because I’ve been reading about this subject for years and I keep up with what is going on.
The link was to a Free Press article — that was for readers on the left. I’m well aware you righties don’t give a flying shit about fair and accountable elections because the kind we’ve got now seem to be working so well in your favor, but I thought others might be interested.
The link on that page is to a pdf from the Government Accountablity Office. Not an extrapolation of anything. Feel free to read it — it says right on it that it’s a report to Congressional requesters.

Why must you turn this blog into a House of Lies?

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 6:29 PM
Comment #117239

Adrienne

I read the link. Did you? It says that abuse is possible. It did not say it found significant examples of abuse. That is extrapolation. It did not say if there was abuse, it was Republicans. That is extraplation of extrapolation.

If you sum up the report it says that voting machines have potential to improve elections, but abuse is possible. It then gives recommendations to improve. That is all you can say. We could say that Democrats cheated or the opposite, but that would not be justified by the facts.

Your article from the Free Press pads the truth a great deal and draws unjustified conclusions. Then you add another layer. The facts don’t justify either conclusion.

I do thank you, however, for making Republicans look reasonable and circumspect in comparison to Democrats.

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 7:33 PM
Comment #117264

Jack,

I’m glad you trust factcheck.org enough to give you hubris in claiming “Bush didn’t lie” Especially given that evidence is mounting that intentional lies by Bush and Cheyney for invading Iraq are becoming more certain.


Bush, Oct. 7, 2002: We’ve learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases . And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein’s regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.
Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.
That statement is open to challenge on two grounds. For one thing, as we’ve seen, the intelligence community was reporting to Bush and Congress that they thought it unlikely that Saddam would give chemical or biological weapons to terrorists – and only “if sufficiently desperate” and as a “last chance to exact revenge” for the very attack that Bush was then advocating.
Furthermore, the claim that Iraq had trained al Qaeda in the use of poison gas turned out to be false, and some in the intelligence community were expressing doubts about it at the time Bush spoke. It was based on statements by a senior trainer for al Qaeda who had been captured in Afghanistan. The detainee, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, took back his story in 2004 and the CIA withdrew all claims based on it. But even at the time Bush spoke, Pentagon intelligence analysts said it was likely al-Libi was lying.
According to newly declassified documents, the Defense Intelligence Agency said in February 2002 – seven months before Bush’s speech – “it is … likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers. Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest… . Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.” The DIA’s doubts were revealed Nov. 6 in newly declassified documents made public by Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, a member of the Intelligence Committee.
Whether or not Bush was aware of the Pentagon’s doubts is not yet clear.

Posted by: Dave at January 26, 2006 8:26 PM
Comment #117285

Yeah Dave

People did just as you did when I wrote the other post or as Adrienne does - they extrapolate.

The President was trying to advocate a policy he believed to be correct. That is what leadership is. I would have done the same thing. Anyone with the courage of his convictions would have done that. You are probably right that someone like John Kerry would not have had that kind of courage. I am sorry if you don’t like it, but you know what? That is just too bad.

I have laid out the facts on many occasions. I have never claimed that the President’s policies were flawless. All human activities are full of mistakes. My study of history makes me wonder how anything ever works. You guys want to have the moral high ground by saying Bush lied. Otherwise all those Dems would not have gone along. I don’t have time to deal with your cognitive dissonance.

The other important aspect of leadership is making choices in the face of uncertainty. That is what the president did. That is what all good leaders do. You have the advantage of not having made ANY decision, so you can claim you would have made a better one. You also have the advantage of being able to ignore consequences of other decisions. Doing something else brings other consequences. You would have left Saddam in power. Live with that.

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 9:10 PM
Comment #117295

“It says that abuse is possible. It did not say it found significant examples of abuse. That is extrapolation.”

The purpose of the report was not meant to prove significant examples of abuse. It is just one piece of information in a large amount of fact gathering that one may put together to get a total picture. The report states: “some of (the) concerns about electronic voting machines have been realized and have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes.”
Like I said, the report confirmed key 2004 stolen election findings. No extrapolation on what the report said.
If you wish to claim that by gathering up and considering everything else I’ve learned about what went on in Ohio in 2004 and then stating that it was stolen is an extrapolation, then go right ahead. Because I am. Yet, in studying this issue, I’ve been careful to sort the wheat from the chaff — just like any detective has to when trying to solve a case.

When everything is taken into account — it becomes easy to say the election was rigged, as well as stolen.
The GAO determining that abuse is possible is one piece of the puzzle. Another is the fact that Diebold is presently fighting several court cases because of horribly shoddy software that they’ve lied to everybody about, and the memory cards on their GEMS servers have just been proven to be easily hacked by single person. Another is the actions of Wally O’ Dell and his brother at ES&S. Another is the actions of Kenneth Blackwell both before and after the election. There are the studies done by statisticians like Freeman, and others regarding the odds of the exit polls being as far off as they ended up being. And of course, there were a lot of very angry and frustrated voters in many Democratic precincts.
It adds up.

Btw, Bob Fitrakis who was the co-author of that Free Press article I linked to and who actually owns and runs Freepress.org isn’t just some stupid conspiracy theorist.
He lives in Ohio and is a Political Science professor with a PHD, and an investigative journalist who has won a whole bunch of awards for his work. He’s also acted as an international election observer and has presented reports to the United Nations.
Fitrakis was the one who called the first public hearings on the election irregularities, and filed the challenge with the Ohio Supreme Court over the election results.
So go ahead and insult me for my link because once again you wish to discredit me Jack, but in reality, it only makes you look like an ass.
Yes, you’ll ignore and dismiss everything — just like you always do. It’s simply more convienient for all you Republican’s to deny the truth — perhaps even to yourselves. Even so, I can’t forgive such an attitude, because everybody in America deserves fair and accountable elections.

Posted by: Adrienne at January 26, 2006 9:49 PM
Comment #117297

You prove the machines could be hacked. Of course, presumably Democrats are as smart as Republicans, so they could also hack the computers. Of course we have no evidence that has happened, so we must conclude that it did happen.

Re exit polls, you probably noticed on the news today that Hamas won the elections. Do you recall what the exit polls showed a few hours ago?

I am not trying to insult you personally. I read the evidence you provide. But it does not support your conclusions. Fitrakis is probably a smart guy, but he can’t find evidence either. This extrapolation is just plausible fiction, sort of like the Bermuda Triangle in Ohio. You could easily prove that it is possible to tamper with a ballot box. We know that has been done on many occasions. But that does not mean that we have found fraud in any particular race.

I also understand that there are a lot of angry Democrats. People are angry when they lose. How often have you met a loser who didn’t believe he deserved to win. Anger is not conducive to good sense. Being angry doesn’t prove anything. Being angry is easy. It substitutes for reason.

Posted by: Jack at January 26, 2006 10:21 PM
Comment #117583

Adrienne,

I find it interesting that you find it necessary to resort to conspiracy theories when your world view is challenged. I read and listen to a great deal of left-liberal material and the theme does seem to be getting more pronounced.

Since the seventies modern liberalism and the left have suffered grieviously at the hands of truth. I suppose a possible explanation would be that those who still need to cling to some aspects of failed ideology have to come up a reason why…

By the way, as a (junior/initiate) member of the vast right wing conspiracy, I recently visited ‘the camps’ which are under construction… you will be pleased to hear that the accomodations are splendid. ‘Reeducation’ will be both fashionable and fun!

(re: humor)

Posted by: esimonson at January 27, 2006 1:24 PM
Comment #117612

For anyone interested, good interview with Mark Crispin Miller regarding election theft.

Posted by: Adrienne at January 27, 2006 3:58 PM
Comment #117623

Jack,

So, given that “at the time Bush spoke, Pentagon intelligence analysts said it was likely al-Libi was lying”, that Bush:
1 - didn’t care so he lied to implement his policy of war or
2 - didn’t bother to read the whole report on his way to war so he didn’t have to ‘lie’?
He wasn’t advocating anything other than an illegal war and he either knew it or chose to be ignorant about it. But, you don’t really care, do you? What’s important to you people is : “trying to advocate a policy he believed to be correct. That is what leadership is” even when reality says you’re wrong. real smart, just freakin’ brilliant.

Posted by: Dave at January 27, 2006 4:33 PM
Comment #117629

Oh, being angry, righteously angry is a pretty good motivator. Just ask the frec’s; of course with us it’s beacuse of ‘reason’ not a substitute.

Posted by: Dave at January 27, 2006 4:48 PM
Comment #117876

I do believe liberals conservatives just don’t have a well-developed sense of humor in the sense of being able to take the joke. For liberals conservatives humor consists of making fun of conservatives liberals. Everything else, I guess, is hate speech.

Posted by: ElliottBay at January 28, 2006 11:03 AM
Comment #117933

esimonson,

“Since the seventies modern liberalism and the left have suffered grieviously at the hands of truth. I suppose a possible explanation would be that those who still need to cling to some aspects of failed ideology have to come up a reason why…”

Since the 1980s more accurately, I believe, was when the “failure” began. This was because of the Republican party using smear tactics such as attributing every sin under the sun with Liberals. They coming out with the “L” word as if it isn’t proper to say in mixed company.

What I believe you are describing is not typical Liberal values and beliefs. This is common and I am still up in the air as to whether it is being done today out of ignorance or malice.

Actions of groups such as the SDS and the Weathermen, Eco-Terrorists and anyother one issue wacko is pushed under the Liberal umbrella. Very effective it dishonest.

Right wing, facism has been proven wrong too! Attributing all “Liberal” ideas as a watered down Marxism leave the equally vaild argument that Conservativism is just a watered down Facsim.

Should we group them in with the Conservatives? The right-wing dictators of South America? The bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma? The right wing militias? How about the Klan? Family clinic bombers? Abortion doctors murderers?

Should the conservatives take the heat for Enron? Tyco? Halliburtons mismanagement/possible corruption? The recent mine disaster that caused all those lives? Global Crossing?

People point to the signing of the anti-corruption legislation by President Bush. A little late for all those investors and it just goes on. (As an aside, the person doing all the uncovering of the corruption is a democrat in NY).

We learned nothing from the runaway Savings and Loan scandals which cost the taxpayers so much.

I love how the conservatives go nuts whenever it appears that someone gets something for nothing… or more than what they think a person should get. They snear at a poor woman in the grocery store using food stamps and look to see what kind of car she drives…

They worry about the nickles and dimes because they believe IT IS COMING OUT OF THEIR POCKET! Yet, they don’t see the money paying off the savings and loans as coming out of their pocket. They don’t seem to be to worried about the loss of livlihoods, investments by the small people and feel their pain.

How much could the $22 billion give to HMOs been used to feed hungry school children.. finance more head starts, help poor students go to college to become successful?

Oh, I forgot. Life only concerns conservatives between conception and birth. After that they are just a burden that want to suck at the tit of public welfare that the conservatives are paying for!

See, it is not fair is it? Having all these things dumped on the meaning of Conservative.

I would love your definition of the modern liberalism.

My Typical Liberalism:
*Living wage for workers.
*A safe working environment.
*Workers compensation.
*Unemployment insurance.
*Age limits on child labor.
*40 Hour work week.
*Overtime pay.
*Equal opportunit for all regardless of race, sex, ethnicity, religion.
*Desegregation
*Voter’s rights removing reading and other types of restrictions on a person’s right to vote.
*Increasing educational benefits for the poor and minorities.

Posted by: Darren7160 at January 28, 2006 3:37 PM
Comment #118276

Darren

You don’t always get what you want by direct means.

When government does something, government has to administer it. Government is bureaucratic in organization. It CANNOT be innovative and have real trouble being flexible. Liberals think you can make people happy and successful by fiat. Some of those ideas were useful in the past and not many people want to do away with core programs. But as the programs expand, they stop achieving their purported goals and start to bureaucratize society.

The best way to ensure long term prosperity, opportunity and most of those goals you list for all is by allowing the market to work.

Posted by: Jack at January 29, 2006 6:29 PM
Comment #118603

Jack,

Perhaps I need to ask you more simply:

Are you still in support of Bu$h because you don’t care about which of these scenarios?

1 - (he) didn’t care (about the pentagon reports that al-Liby was probably lying) so he lied to implement his policy of war or
2 - didn’t bother to
read the whole report on his way to war so he didn’t have to ‘lie’?

Thanks for the clarification.

Posted by: Dave at January 31, 2006 8:34 AM
Post a comment