ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [51] -- Some Positivity

[ Posted Friday, October 10th, 2008 – 16:44 PDT ]

While we're all waiting for someone to leak the Palin Troopergate Report (which is reminiscent of waiting for "Fitzmas" during the whole Scooter Libby fiasco), let us take a brief look at the presidential race.

Things are getting pretty nasty out on the McCain campaign trail, it seems. Not much talk of "reaching across the aisle" these days. Now, while anyone with a halfway-decent brain saw this coming, this obviously doesn't include most of the mainstream media. Of course the end of the campaign was going to be nasty. Of course McCain and his minions were going to throw everything they could at Obama. Barack Obama himself knew this was coming. Democrats should have known it was coming. It's the old story of the scorpion and the frog -- McCain is getting nasty because he's a Republican candidate for president. "I'm a Republican, it's my nature," in other words.

Now, if that unfairly slanders some Republican candidates for lesser elections than president who eschew such tactics, then I do apologize. But at the top of the ticket, we have seen this type of thing before. Pretty much every four years, I'd say. So it really should come as no surprise to anyone that this is where we find ourselves.

The only difference this time around is that it looks like it's not going to work. And that is absolutely enraging some McCain supporters. From a Washington Post article titled "Anger is Crowd's Overarching Emotion at McCain Rally":

"No, I'm not mad, I'm pissed," said Joan Schmitz, who owns a plumbing company here. She said she was frustrated with polls showing Obama surging, McCain's performance in a Tuesday night debate, Obama himself, the media, and the liberal group ACORN, which she said was registering voters fraudulently.

Noting Obama's connections with Ayers, she said that "if it was a Republican, it would be nonstop," referring to what she said was the media ignoring the controversial acquaintance.

"I can't stand to look at him, I don't trust him. I don't like the circle of friends he keeps, I don't like his policies," Schmitz said of Obama. "I'm pissed off by it. I'm beyond mad. How is he climbing up in the polls?"

And, ironically enough, the madder and more "pissed off" McCain supporters get (especially when they're on national television), the more independent and uncommitted voters are deciding that Obama looks like the better choice.

Republicans are even setting up their own version of what is going to happen on Election Day -- watch for cries soon after that the election was "stolen" from McCain (note that ACORN reference earlier -- read the full article for an explanation).

So in response to Schmitz' question, Obama is climbing in the polls right now because he isn't being a demagogue. While McCain is. Which turns off the people in the middle -- where elections are always won and lost.

In keeping with this theme, and because I felt sorry for awarding the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award last week to the entire Democratic Congressional delegation, I though this week I'd give them a break and use the Talking Points portion of our program to showcase some good things they managed to get done. But first, let's get this week's awards out of the way.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

While Henry Waxman was in the running for Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week due to his hearings which grilled some Wall Street fatcats on their fatcattery and fatcatting ways, I noticed that Congress immediately and severely punished them... by handing them an extra $36 billion dollars. So while the hearings were high in sheer entertainment value, the results were not.

No, this week the MIDOTW award has to go once again to Barack Obama. Or, as John McCain likes to call him, "that one." Obama did a good job in the second debate, but more impressive was his astronomical rise in the polls. This really started last week, but shows no sign of abating, and really turned the corner this week. Now, it's a little early to measure the drapes for the Oval Office, but if Obama can just hold on to the gains he made this week, this election is not even going to be close. Of course, any Republican "October Surprise" could turn this right back around, but John McCain looking cranky and angry just isn't going to do it.

He also wins the award for his masterful use of the Keating Five this week. He pulled the gun out of his holster, showed it to McCain, and then slowly put it away again. The newsfolks actually mentioned it for the first time in the entire campaign this week, but Obama (by not driving the point home with a sledgehammer) showed that while he has negative stuff on McCain he doesn't really need to use it at this point. Which, again, appeals to the middle-of-the-road voters.

One more point in Obama's favor was his announcement that he has bought a half-hour chunk of network prime time less than a week before the election to talk directly to the American people. McCain just can't afford a stunt like this, and it could prove to be the most brilliant maneuver in a campaign full of such smart moves.

Barack Obama is indeed the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week. Well done, Senator Obama!

[Congratulate Senator Barack Obama on his Senate contact page to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Allow me to preview this award with a movie flashback. From the classic film Casablanca:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I'm shocked -- shocked! -- to find that gambling is going on in here!

[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]

Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.

In this week's Ultimate Irony Division of the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award, we have Senator Jay "Rocky IV" Rockefeller, IV, cast in the role of Captain Renault. Rocky IV declared this week that he was shocked -- Shocked! -- to find out the government is abusing the powers he so generously gave them with the various emasculations of FISA, which he had rammed through earlier. I mean, it's not as if the entire lefty blogosphere didn't warn him that ultimate power always ultimately leads to corruption. But Rocky IV takes oodles of money from the telecommunications industry ("your winnings, sir") to pass their pet legislation from the committee he chairs, and now he is going to get to the bottom of all this.

Yeah, right.

I wrote about this yesterday in more detail, but the most amusing line from Rocky IV had to be the following (from ABC News, who broke the story):

The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), called the allegations "extremely disturbing" and said the committee has begun its own examination.

"We have requested all relevant information from the Bush Administration," Rockefeller said Thursday. "The Committee will take whatever action is necessary."

Um, you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. This week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week is struck in special honor of Jay Rockefeller, IV, who is now the all-time champion winner of the MDDOTW with a reprehensible six wins. This week's special statuette takes the form of a small golden fox wearing a small golden guard's uniform, sitting in front of a tiny golden henhouse.

For shame, Senator Rockefeller, for shame.

[Contact Senator John D. Rockefeller, IV on his Senate contact page to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 51 (10/10/08)

In the midst of an intense presidential campaign, I can get a little partisan and negative here in the Talking Points at times, so I'd like to take a one-week break and instead spotlight a few good things the 110th Congress actually got done. If you're interested in countering McCain's lies out on the campaign trail, there is always the Democratic Party's Count The Lies website (now a wiki!) to glean talking points from (they're up to 128 as of this writing).

But let's focus on the positive, for one week. Here are Talking Points to show that Democrats have actually gotten some things done in the past two years. Of course, there is always room for improvement, but we should at least acknowledge the achievements they did manage to accomplish.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has a much more exhaustive list of these on her website, if you're interested.

 

1
   Minimum Wage Hike

I am at a loss as to why Democrats consistently hide this shining light under a barrel. This was historic, and directly influenced a lot of people's lives, and yet you hear almost nothing about it -- especially on the campaign trail. Which mystifies me. Democrats should beat this drum loud and long, since they deserve credit for it.

"Democrats in Congress raised the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour, where it had been for a decade, to $6.55 an hour today. Next July, it will rise again to $7.25 an hour. Any American worker making minimum wage is seeing their salary improve over forty percent as a result of Democrats fighting Republican obstructionism in Washington. So remember, Democrats put money in your pocket. Democrats gave some of the hardest-working Americans a 40% pay raise. And Republicans didn't want you to have that money, and fought against it."

 

2
   New GI Bill

Again, one wonders why this isn't front and center of all Democratic campaigns for all offices. Democrats, led by freshman Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, passed the biggest expansion in benefits for American soldiers of all time. So why aren't they shouting it from the skies, every chance they get? It's a mystery....

"I never want to hear that Democrats don't support the troops ever again from any Republican. Democrats in Congress passed the GI Bill for the 21st Century over loud objections from some Republicans, including John McCain, who called it 'too generous.' You know what? I don't think it's 'too generous' to allow veterans to go to college. I don't think it's 'too generous' to pay a debt to our fighting men and women that can never be truly repaid. Democrats fought hard for the GI Bill, against Republicans up to and including President Bush. But we got it passed, because we consider supporting the troops one of our most sacred duties as elected officials."

 

3
   Stimulus Package

OK, I fully admit that passing out free money to taxpayers isn't exactly the boldest thing to do in an election year, but still, people need to be reminded who got this passed.

"Remember that $600 that taxpayers got earlier this year? You can thank Democrats for getting that stimulus package through. Now, obviously, it wasn't really enough, but it was a step in the right direction -- a step that Congressional Republicans fought hard against. Democrats put money in the taxpayer's pocket, Republicans fight such stimulus. That's all you need to know on Election Day."

 

4
   Democrats better on energy

Democrats have actually been getting some things done on energy, although once again, you don't hear about it much on the campaign trail. This one has gotten more exposure than some issues, though, because of the price of gas, mostly. But it needs to be pointed out who has a long-term answer to the problem, and who does not.

"Democrats, over the strong objection of President Bush and Congressional Republicans, managed to get some positive things done on energy. Democrats passed the first hike in fuel economy standards for cars and trucks in a generation. Democrats also saved the tax breaks for green energy that are absolutely necessary to move America off foreign oil and create green jobs for the future -- again, over the loud objections of Republicans. Democrats are planning for America's energy future, when the only thing Republicans have to say on the issue is 'drill, baby, drill.' We can free America from Middle Eastern oil, if the Republicans would only follow when Democrats lead on the issue."

 

5
   Democrats help Americans pay for college

Education is such a natural issue for Democrats, and Congress actually got quite a few things done on this front. But you wouldn't know it from listening to candidates. Come on, people, this is one of the Democratic Party's strong points! Drive it home!

"Democrats in Congress did everything they could to help Americans afford good education for their children, while all Republicans had to offer was obstructionism and vetoes. Democrats did manage to cut college loan rates in half in the biggest student aid bill in half a century, made sure that the credit crunch didn't affect students needing loans, passed a landmark College Consumer's Bill of Rights which expanded access to college for low-income students and reined in abuses in the student loan industry, and improved the successful Head Start program. If you are a parent who is worried about education costs being too high, there is simply only one party to vote for -- Democrats."

 

6
   Health care

Once again, a winning issue for Democrats. Some of these laws actually did get some media coverage, but voters need to be reminded of them out on the campaign trail.

"While Democrats tried to expand health care to 10 million children, sadly President Bush vetoed it and enough Republicans in Congress voted with him to deny these children health care. But Democrats did manage to get some positive bills passed into law, including fighting back against the Bush administration's attempts to gut Medicaid, requiring Medicare to bargain for cheaper prices on drugs by lifting the Republican ban on doing so, and ending discrimination against mental health claims by insurance companies. If you want to fix health care in this country, you need to help us get more Democrats elected so we can do so without Republicans being able to block our efforts."

 

7
   Republicans voted against Mother's Day

And finally, one from the archives (from FTP [31], at the very end). I know this was supposed to be all about Democratic victories in Congress, but this one just begs to be repeated by any House Democratic challenger, as many times as possible.

"Republicans have become so obsessed with obstructionism and so blind to the voters' wish that Congress get something done that they actually voted against honoring Mother's Day. This is a disgrace. The Washington Post ran a story about it with the headline: 'Republicans Vote Against Moms; No Word Yet on Puppies, Kittens.' I mean, what is next? Are the Republicans going to come out against apple pie, too? America deserves better than this. Vote Democratic in 2008. You know why? Because Democrats love their mothers, but apparently 178 House Republicans don't."

 

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground

Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

-- Chris Weigant

 

51 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [51] -- Some Positivity”

  1. [1] 
    Michale wrote:


    Republicans are even setting up their own version of what is going to happen on Election Day — watch for cries soon after that the election was "stolen" from McCain (note that ACORN reference earlier — read the full article for an explanation).

    In other words, Republicans have taken a page from the DEMOCRATS playbook where the Democrats planned on contesting the 2006 election MONTHS before the election occurred..

    So let me ask ya'all.. Present company excepted (IE CW) do ya'all feel that ALL VOTER fraud is bad, regardless of whether it comes from Democrats or Republicans??

    Or, is it just that voter fraud by Republicans is bad, but voter fraud by Democrats is perfectly OK...

    Just curious...

    Michale.....

    crossposted to Huffingtonpost

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Is this a trick question?

  3. [3] 
    Osborne Ink wrote:

    Michale, you are statistically more likely to get hit by lightning than to commit voter fraud. ACORN is yet another red herring.

    Chris: did you see the news about McCain getting booed by his own crowd when he tried to say Obama is "a decent man"? Talk about reaping the whirlwind... Maybe in these closing weeks, Obama should let McCain do nasty-negative and go back to "Yes We Can/Audacity of Hope" commercials.

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Elizabeth

    Not really.. Although for some, I already know the answer.. :D

    @Ink

    Michale, you are statistically more likely to get hit by lightning than to commit voter fraud. ACORN is yet another red herring.

    I noticed that you did not answer the question..

    However, if you want to play the statistics game, statistically, on 10 Sep 2001, a person was more likely to get hit by lightning than they were to get killed by terrorists.

    We all know what happened on 11 Sep, 2001, right?

    I merely pointed out how interesting it is when voter fraud was a DEM hot button issue MONTHS before the 2006 elections, even though there was NO conclusive evidence to support the contention.

    Now, in 2008, there IS conclusive evidence that DEMs are engaging in voter fraud and now, ALL OF THE SUDDEN, it's an issue the Dems want swept under the carpet.

    How can any logical or rational person NOT find such a position hypocritical??

    Michale.....

  5. [5] 
    akadjian wrote:

    It's just fascinating to watch how conservatives are flailing for anything that will stick right now.

    The thing I can't believe is people aren't angrier that McCain did nothing when a supporter (who looks an awful lot like a McCain plant) called Obama a terrorist.

    I felt in my heart that it was only a matter of time before conservatives starting calling Americans terrorists, but when it actually happened it was a little shocking.

    Michale, do you believe Obama is a terrorist?

  6. [6] 
    Osborne Ink wrote:

    Michale,

    "Dems" are not engaging in voter fraud. There has, as yet, been NO voter fraud. Some of ACORN's paid enrollment personnel decided to fake registrations rather than work the street like they were supposed to. There's no "fraud" until Donald shows up to vote, or Michale shows up to vote more than once.

    RED HERRING. And a long way from paperless ballots and hackable vote machines, not to mention voter purges targeted at a demographic group (i.e. RACE).

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    @David

    Michale, do you believe Obama is a terrorist?

    Of course not. And I also agree that it is deplorable that McCain didn't publicly and immediately reproach that individual for their actions. It was a disgusting and perverse accusation.

    However, consider that, even if McCain HAD publicly called out that individuals disgusting yell and slammed the person for it, Dems would STILL be making the argument that it was a "plant".

    Regardless of that, McCain should have still jumped on it..

    Having said all of that, Obama HAS shown a very sad lapse in judgment for associating with a known and proven terrorist (Ayers) and for not fully disclosing the extent of the relationship. There are now reports that the relationship might have been actually in the early to mid 80s between the wives.

    These kinds of rumors/reports are why Obama needs to come down cleanly, promptly and honestly and tell his supporters EXACTLY what is what. Not thru surrogates and spokespersons, but himself. Until he does that, any slams to Obama's judgment DOES have validity...

    @Ink

    Sorry, you are incorrect. There HAS been voter fraud. A dead woman in Houston "showed up" to vote in the primary elections.. There are reports that another dead person showed up in a different precinct.

    So, you are incorrect. There HAS been VOTER fraud.

    But you are partially correct insofar as the predominant issue is REGISTRATION fraud. I suspect you are simply splitting hairs to ignore the ugly truth. In the 2006 elections, Democrats were making the allegations of VOTER fraud without the qualifying "registration" distinction that you attempt to make now.

    The simple fact is, VOTER/REGISTRATION fraud was a BIG hot button issue for Democrats in 2006..

    FACT...

    At the time, there really wasn't any serious evidence that fraud was being committed..

    FACT

    In the here and now, there is real and compelling evidence that Democrats (in the guise of ACORN) are committing gross VOTER/REGISTRATION fraud..

    FACT....

    In the here and now, Democrats are pooh-poohing away the issue of VOTER/REGISTRATION fraud, saying it's only the Republicans setting things up for challenging...

    FACT....

    Now, I ask you. As the sane, rational and logical person I suspect you to be, what can be construed from these facts? Employing Occam's Razor to these facts, what is the most likely explanation?

    Michale.....

  8. [8] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So, terrorism has become a meaningless hate word now?

    If it is to be used so broadly, is the CIA a terrorist organization? What about our founding fathers? Was the Boston tea party a terrorist act?

    I find this branding of any anti government/anti specific subsection of society violent act as terrorism really takes away the shades of grays that this sort of act can have. From what I've read, Ayers specifically took steps to insure people were not killed. Does that change the definition? Are abortion clinic bombers "terrorists" or is a different word to more accurately define them more useful?

    The flip side to this is Ayers is somewhat reformed and an upstanding member of Chicago society to the point that most people in Chicago who deal with Ayers find the whole thing silly. Including the prosecutor who prosecuted many of the Weathermen at the time. What makes this interesting is the most vocal on the far right that bring this all up are alleged hardcore Christians. So much for the christian ideal of redemption, eh? I hope those who criticize Obama for his association with Ayers see their hypocrisy next time they sing Amazing Grace.

    As to voter fraud: could you please point out an election in American history that did not have at least a little fraud on both sides? It's going to happen that's a given. At lower levels it should cancel it's self out. It's how wide spread and if it has official endorsement that's important. I heard an ACORN leader on NPR the other day. They said that they were not in support of any fraud and if was happening the people responsible should be prosecuted. That works for me as long as it's applied equally to all sides.

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Bashi

    So, terrorism has become a meaningless hate word now?

    NEVER.. Ever.. NOT EVER...

    If it is to be used so broadly, is the CIA a terrorist organization? What about our founding fathers? Was the Boston tea party a terrorist act?

    If you can find ANY instance of action taken by any of the afore mentioned entities that meet the following criteria.....

    Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.

    ..... then I guess you could call it "terrorism". But I am guessing you can't, so you can't...

    From what I've read, Ayers specifically took steps to insure people were not killed.

    You've read wrong...

    Consider that Ayers' terrorist cohorts that were killed when the bomb they were working on prematurely detonated. They were terrorists, so no big loss.. But the bomb they were working on was a nail bomb.. As someone who has no small expertise in the field can tell you, a nail bomb has one use and one use ONLY. It is designed to kill people.

    Consider the case of 9yr old John Murtagh. His family's home was firebombed by Ayers' group on a cold Feb morning, WHILE THE ENTIRE FAMILY SLEPT... It was only the brave actions of a neighbor that prevented even more destruction..

    No, the simple fact is, the ONLY reason that Ayers' group didn't kill MANY people is because they were incompetent...

    Hardly a credible case for taking "steps to insure people were not killed".

    There are no such things as "nice" terrorists. A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist. Whether you are talking about Bin Laden or Ayers or McVeigh. They are ALL terrorists.. And the ONLY thing that such cowardly scumbags deserve is a bullet to the brain..

    It's THAT simple....


    As to voter fraud: could you please point out an election in American history that did not have at least a little fraud on both sides? It's going to happen that's a given. At lower levels it should cancel it's self out. It's how wide spread and if it has official endorsement that's important. I heard an ACORN leader on NPR the other day. They said that they were not in support of any fraud and if was happening the people responsible should be prosecuted. That works for me as long as it's applied equally to all sides.

    Strange.. That is what Republicans said during the 2006 elections... "It's only a LITTLE fraud" and "It'll all cancel itself out in the end".

    Democrats would have NONE of that... Their mantra was "FRAUD IS BAD!! FRAUD IS EVIL!!!"...

    But now, when the fraud is in THEIR favor....

    {{{{chirp}}} {{{chirp}}} {{{chirp}}}
    Cricket city....

    I am honestly at a loss to understand why rational and logical people simply refuse to see the hypocrisy here. Ya'all KNOW that Democrats have been screaming VOTER FRAUD since Gore lost to Bush in 2000...

    Now, you don't hear a PEEP from Democrats about Voter Fraud and ya'all think that's perfectly fine and normal???

    Ex-squeeze me??? Baking powder????

    Michale.....
    Michale.....

  10. [10] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Michale,

    Of course voter fraud is bad. Look into the news about ACORN though. In every case I can find it was ACORN itself who discovered the fraud and reported on it.

    Imagine that. An organization that self polices itself. Isn't that conservatism at it's best? Self regulation. If only Wall St firms worked this well.

    Also, remember this is just voter registration. To actually have fraudulent votes, people would have to show up at the polls w/ false IDs, etc. This is not what happened. No false votes were registered. (Though when you say voter fraud that is what people will think.)

    In the 2000 elections, however, circumstances were different. Votes were "lost" and miscounted and it actually affected an election.

    It's a big distinction. One has a direct affect on who was elected President of the US. The other does not affect the election at all and was actually reported by ACORN itself.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0810/S00259.htm

    Though I admire your attempt to pick up this latest GOP talking point and run with it, there's really nothing there.

    I suggest moving on to the next GOP non-issue.

    Ayers isn't working. This voter fraud piece doesn't have any legs. Let's take a poll. What will be next?

    a) The return of the Reverend Wright
    b) The liberal media destroyed McCain's campaign
    c) Obama is a terrorist-loving alien
    d) An actual plan for governing in down economic times

    What will they come up with next?
    - David

  11. [11] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.

    ….. then I guess you could call it "terrorism". But I am guessing you can't, so you can't…

    Well, the CIA has definitely supported groups that fit that description to a tee. All the "freedom fighter" aka death squads in Central America before and during the Reagan era for starters. I think a few of the more violent acts in Boston leading up to the Revolution also qualify under that strict definition.

    Consider the case of 9yr old John Murtagh. His family's home was firebombed by Ayers' group on a cold Feb morning, WHILE THE ENTIRE FAMILY SLEPT… It was only the brave actions of a neighbor that prevented even more destruction..

    Do you have any proof the Weathermen were behind this bombing beyond Murtagh's suspiciously timed May, 2008 article? Considering I can’t find any references to it beyond that single piece on the net and the fact he is running for office under a Republican ticket this election cycle makes me think political hatchet job. The authorities never had enough proof to link it to the weathermen. Suspicions yes, but in the end, innocent until proven guilty and all...

    Consider that Ayers' terrorist cohorts that were killed when the bomb they were working on prematurely detonated. They were terrorists, so no big loss.. But the bomb they were working on was a nail bomb.. As someone who has no small expertise in the field can tell you, a nail bomb has one use and one use ONLY. It is designed to kill people.

    They were definitely heading in a terrorist direction which abruptly changed after this incident. After this bomb the group went completely away from targeting people and bombed unoccupied buildings at night.

    Violent radical leftists, yes. Not so convinced of the terrorist label. I think the difference in terms is both useful and important.

    Ayers also turned himself in and faced the authorities.

    They are ALL terrorists.. And the ONLY thing that such cowardly scumbags deserve is a bullet to the brain..

    It's THAT simple….

    Not if you ever actually want to deal with the problem rather than further propagate it. Kill as many as you can, but at some point there will be a moment when they might just walk away. Take them up on it and it goes away at least in that particular microcosm. The IRA are a good example though it was not easy and took a while. The weathermen are another. Ayers WAS a violent radical now an upstanding member of society. That is if you can get past the revenge element...

    I think in the end what bugs me about this charge is it has very little to do with links to violent sixties radicalism and all to do with wrongly linking Obama with radical islam. Somehow I don’t think the crowds at rallies and peanut gallery in the blogs would have their panties in quite the same bunch if the line was he associated with a former violent sixties radical rather than he associated with a terrorist.

    As to election fraud:

    Fraud is bad. Fraud is evil.

    But I repeat the question: Could you please point out an election in American history that did not have at least a little fraud on both sides?

    Also, can you prove supporters of the democrats are perpetrating more voter fraud than supporters of the republicans? Of all the stories on this subject I see most are about fraud on the republican side...

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Could somebody please tell me - with any degree of certainty and/or wishful thinking - that this election is going to be so far away from being anywhere near close so as to make any amount of fraud a completely moot point?

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    @David

    I don't pick ANYONE's talking points. I discuss what concerns me.

    As to the Voter Fraud issue, my point is twofold.

    1. In the 2006 Elections, Democrats were screaming VOTER FRAUD and DIEBOLD months before the elections took place.

    FACT...

    2. The is REAL Voter & Registration Fraud occurring right now that favors Democrats and the Dems are quiet on the issue

    FACT...

    How is this not hypocrisy?? You haven't answered that question.

    In every case I can find it was ACORN itself who discovered the fraud and reported on it.

    You must be picking and choosing your "cases" quite carefully..

    ACORN is under investigation in Ohio and at least eight other states - including Missouri, where the FBI said it's planning to look into potential voter fraud - for over-the-top efforts to get as many names as possible on the voter rolls regardless of whether a person is registered or eligible.

    Hardly looks like ACORN would initiate such investigations, eh??

    I have read a dozen articles on on ACORN investigations and not one of them stated that ACORN initiated ANY of the investigations.

    In the 2000 elections, however, circumstances were different. Votes were "lost" and miscounted and it actually affected an election.

    So, you are saying it's better to have a repeat of 2000 and wait until this fraud actually affects the election??

    Regardless of that, you are side-stepping the question. Why were Democrats screaming and whining about fraud but now, when the fraud is to their benefit, they are silent?

    How is this not hypocrisy??

    @Bashi

    Well, the CIA has definitely supported groups that fit that description to a tee. All the "freedom fighter" aka death squads in Central America before and during the Reagan era for starters.

    Yea, it's a shame that sometimes we have to get in bed with such people. We had bases in Libya during the early 80s so the concept is there. But sometimes, oft times, the end DOES justify the means...


    I think a few of the more violent acts in Boston leading up to the Revolution also qualify under that strict definition.

    Specifically?? I think the most "violent" form of "terrorism" (as I laid out the definition) was the Boston Tea Party. Although, I would think you would be hard-pressed to make the case that pouring tea into the bay would be considered a violent act. Destructive, to be sure. But hardly violent.

    Do you have any proof the Weathermen were behind this bombing beyond Murtagh's suspiciously timed May, 2008 article? Considering I can’t find any references to it beyond that single piece on the net and the fact he is running for office under a Republican ticket this election cycle makes me think political hatchet job. The authorities never had enough proof to link it to the weathermen. Suspicions yes, but in the end, innocent until proven guilty and all…

    Any proof besides they were terrorists?? No, not really, beyond Dohrn's letter promising more bombings..

    Has Ayers' ever denied that bombing?? Nope.. In the case of PROVEN terrorists it is guilty until proven innocent.

    However, I do find it interesting that you would invoke the "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY" mantra to protect terrorists.

    So, this MUST mean that you believe that George Bush & Dick Cheney et al are completely innocent of any crimes, right??

    They were definitely heading in a terrorist direction which abruptly changed after this incident. After this bomb the group went completely away from targeting people and bombed unoccupied buildings at night.

    Violent radical leftists, yes. Not so convinced of the terrorist label. I think the difference in terms is both useful and important.

    Sorry, by ANY accepted definition of terrorism out there, Ayers' is a terrorist...

    Any distinction is politically motivated and therefore, completely false..

    A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist..

    The IRA are a good example though it was not easy and took a while.

    The IRA is a perfect example of my point. While the general public believes that it was political and diplomatic actions that brought about an end to the IRA as a terrorist threat, those in the circles of CT know the true story. There was a systematic campaign of covert assaults and neutralizations by the Brits of key IRA personnel that forced the IRA to accept the diplomatic solution.

    That is EXACTLY how you deal with terrorists. You ramp up the pressure so great that, to survive the group has to accept a political solution..

    What do you think?? That terrorists wake up one day and think to themselves, "Ya know what?? All this violence isn't getting us anywhere. Let's TALK with our enemies?" If you honestly think that, then you are a very idealistically naive individual.

    What usually happens is, terrorists wake up one day and think to themselves, "We're getting slaughtered!! We need to accept SOMETHING or we're all going to be dead!!"

    And THAT is what brings about an end to terrorism. The age old carrot/stick approach, using the smallest carrot and the largest stick possible..


    The weathermen are another. Ayers WAS a violent radical now an upstanding member of society. That is if you can get past the revenge element…

    I ***MIGHT*** be able to. I readily admit that it WOULD be a chore but I MIGHT be able to. If Ayers would accept that his actions WERE terrorism and if he had shown any remorse for them, like many of his fellow terrorists have done.

    But, like the coward that he is, Ayers refuses to even acknowledge that his actions WERE terrorism and, as far as showing remorse? He is quoted as saying that they wish they had done MORE terrorism. And, please, don't bother with the "He was misquoted" crap. I read the original NY Times article and the quote was not mis-quoted or out of context.

    So, no. No forgiveness from me. A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist. And Ayers is a terrorist.


    I think in the end what bugs me about this charge is it has very little to do with links to violent sixties radicalism and all to do with wrongly linking Obama with radical islam

    I completely agree.. For me, the Ayers issue is simply one where Obama showed bad judgment. It could EASILY be explained away as a virgin politician mis-stepping into the political lime-light. What concerns me a LOT more is Obama's continued bad judgment in not addressing the issue head on and putting it to rest. Something, I might add, he is well-known for doing.

    So, we have a person of integrity who is KNOWN for getting out in front of things and laying issues to rest, being completely mum about his link to a terrorist.

    That raises alarm bells with me. It indicates to me that there is a LOT more to the Ayers' connection than we know. Than Obama wants us to know.

    And that worries me.

    with a former violent sixties radical rather than he associated with a terrorist.

    Speaking as a cop, I really don't see any difference. :D

    As a (mostly) liberal, I do recognize the difference and concede your point.


    As to election fraud:

    Fraud is bad. Fraud is evil.

    Common ground. A truly wonderful thing.. Peruse some of the other Left Oriented forums. You will find that the DEMOCRAT attitude is one of The End Justifies The Means when it comes to this issue. Not that I don't firmly and sometimes enthusiastically agree with such an attitude. I just find it shocking, coming from Democrats. Messes up my whole mind and sends me scrambling for a playcard so I can determine who are Democrats and who are Republicans..

    Also, can you prove supporters of the democrats are perpetrating more voter fraud than supporters of the republicans?

    Do a google for ACORN... You'll get a listing... ACORN has donated almost a million dollars to the Obama campaign...

    @Elizabeth

    Could somebody please tell me - with any degree of certainty and/or wishful thinking - that this election is going to be so far away from being anywhere near close so as to make any amount of fraud a completely moot point?

    Although my track record stinks (I tend to resort to "wishcasting" more than anything else :D) I am willing to wager a significant amount of quatloos that, REGARDLESS of how close the election is, there will be well-coordinated plans to contest the election at every level by the losing side.

    And we have, undeniably, the Democrats to thank for this. They are the political party that has perfected the LET'S WIN ELECTIONS WITH THE COURTS concept, at least in principle, while failing miserably in execution..

    Michale....

  14. [14] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I'd love to debate more with you, Michale, but I'm going to go help the Obama campaign. That seems much more productive than arguing about how upset McCain is about ACORN.

    Ever notice that the party of personal responsibility spends an awful lot of time talking about how everything is everybody else's fault? Liberals, Democrats, Pelosi, unions, teachers, newspapers, now it's ACORN.

    Old.

    But if you want to keep at it, here's a site that talks about how ACORN reported the issue.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/13/election-acorn-voter-fraud

    And here's an article about the Nevada case. ACORN is the group that turned in it's employees.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/07/AR2008100701457.html

    I'll post more if you'd like.

    - David

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    @David

    And, once again, you fail to answer the question.

    WHY were the Democrats hyper-active on VOTER FRAUD in 2006, but are now quiet on the issue??

    Yea, I read all the ACORN articles, including the new one today where ACORN registered "MICKEY MOUSE" in Florida to vote.

    And yes, the Acorn rep whines that they do what they can to prevent registration fraud.

    And yet, all across the country, it is STILL happening.

    And, you may try to pooh pooh the issue away as a GOP stunt.

    But, as we have ALL agreed in this thread, Voter/Registration fraud is bad.

    So what does that say about Democrats when it's the GOP who is at the forefront of this fight?

    Michale.....

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    From our TOTALLY Meaningless Dept

    http://www.boredquiz.com/personality_quiz/which-world-war-ii-leader-are-you/1

    Interesting Quiz.. You can opt to CLOSE the web page after taking the test, but before all the personal info is requested and it will allow you to go directly to the results.

    My results??

    http://www.boredquiz.com/uploads/internal/quizzes/which-world-war-ii-leader-are-you/roosevelt.jpg

    You are most like Franklin D. Roosevelt. Uncompromising and fearless, you realize the state of things and know that losing is not an option.

    :D

    Michale.....

  17. [17] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So what does that say about Democrats when it's the GOP who is at the forefront of this fight?

    There is a fight? No, really. A quick search of Digg for Democrat based voter fraud required digging very deep in to the upcoming stories and of the few stories I came across, all were either extreme partisan political blogs or press outfits like the New York Post, not exactly bastions of journalistic excellence. Beyond trolling conservative blogs and watching the talking heads on Fox and the like gavel to gavel this is a non story. as in it does not exist. I think the few who come across it and see what it is all about quickly realize that for the most part ACORN brings up most of the fraud it's self and it boils down to individual zealots and individual greed: padding the registrations to keep with the quota so to keep the low paying job. Also the republican ticket has gone so dirty and thrown everything up to and including the kitchen sink at Obama to see what sticks that this is a case of crying wolf so much than when eaten by one, nobody really notices or cares.

  18. [18] 
    akadjian wrote:

    WHY were the Democrats hyper-active on VOTER FRAUD in 2006, but are now quiet on the issue?

    Because it is nowhere near the issue that the GOP is making it out to be.

    The GOP is interested in denying people the right to vote. People who won't vote for them. Time and again they have worked to deny the votes of poor people. By contrast, the ACORN examples are cases of individuals who are trying to make an extra buck by submitting false registrations. ACORN is not encouraging false registrations - in fact, they are working to prevent it.

    The GOP, however, as well as making this a political issue, hopes to make the process more difficult for ACORN so that it's harder to register Democratic voters.

    Why are the Republicans so interested in ACORN now? Altruism? Puh-leez. I give you more credit than that you'd argue that.

    The GOP wants to inflate the issue to make it seem like more than what it is. That's why you never see details about how ACORN is turning in their own employees. That's why they say it's Voter Fraud.

    So what does this say about the GOP? They're worried because their candidate is behind and are making as much as they can out of any issue to try to benefit politically.

    Do the Democrats do this too? Sure. After all this is politics. But if you look at their campaign, it's much more focused on issues and less on political games.

    - David

    p.s. Tip of the day for McCain. Quit blaming your situation on others. Offer some substance.

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122394051071230749.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

    I don't know what articles you people are reading. In all the ones I have read (and the number is quite large and growing) there is a one or two self-serving whine from ACORN on how THEY do stop the phony registrations.

    But, I have yet to read ANY supporting evidence that ACORN actually INITIATES the investigations that are wide-spread and become even more so..

    Michale.....

  20. [20] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Michale,

    For objective news on this issue, I'll admit it's getting difficult to find. Most of the articles are right wing bloggers or pieces like that opinion article in the WSJ. None of these make an effort to find out what is really going on. They just try to tell you what they want you to believe.

    Don't be duped, Michale! That article is highly biased.

    He cites something called the Employment Policies Institute. What they don't tell you is, this group was founded by Rick Berman, a lobbyist for the restaurant and bar business.

    Berman's goal is to keep the minimum wage low for his business clients. He does this by electing Republicans. Hardly a non-partisan source.

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hvb0LfZQ5mY-X8PYSvYxTe3QGgdgD93LVDS80

    ACORN does a lot of good despite a few bad apples. Don't believe the hype!

    - David

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's funny how, when it goes against Democrats, it's "hard to find objective sources" and it's "hype"

    When it goes against Republicans, it's all objective and pure gospel.

    I see that a LOT. I guess it's simply the nature of the beast. I had hoped for better.

    But, as usual, I think you are wrong. Even the Obama campaign is now starting to realize that the issue is not going to go away and is getting larger.

    Senator Obama had to change his "FIGHT THE SMEARS" website, because a "smear" was actually found to be true, with regards to ACORN.

    The Obama campaign is also actively trying to distance itself from ACORN on several fronts.

    Why would these things happen if there is nothing to the ACORN allegations? It's like Colonel Jessup in A FEW GOOD MEN. If Jessup's men always follow orders, then Santiago would not have been in any danger. It wouldn't have been necessary to transfer him off the base.

    If ACORN is all hype and subjective, why is the Obama campaign changing the information about Obama? Why is Obama trying to distance himself and play down his role in ACORN, when just as late as a couple days ago, Obama was all about ACORN?

    The only LOGICAL explanation is that the ACORN issue is NOT hype, that there ARE issues there that Democrats are involved in fraud..

    Michale.....

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    RANT

    Since I am on a Hypocrisy Binge here, let's continue down this merry road..

    Since I don't want to cause CW any more work, simply GOOGLE the BOLD text to read the article.

    Halloween display aims for 'shock value'
    Democratic backer sends message by showing McCain, in KKK robe, chasing Obama

    "It looks friendly...."
    -Georgia Verdier, president of the Elmira-Corning Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

    Ex-squeeze me?? Baking powder?? A depiction of McCain as a KKK terrorist, chasing Obama is "friendly" enough??

    Imagine the outcry from Democrats if a Republican put up a Halloween display that had Obama decked out as a terrorist being chased by McCain dressed as a soldier.

    One has to wonder if Democrats would say that it is "friendly"?? Actually, no. One DOESN'T have to wonder at all...

    Northland Couple Warns of Political Credit Card Fraud

    A Kansas couple discovered that a $2300 dollar donation to Senator Obama was on their credit card. The couple are dedicated Republicans who are voting McCain.

    Imagine the Democrat outcry if the donation had been to McCain and the couple in question were devoted to Obama. It's not difficult to imagine the hysterical screams of FRAUD and such that would echo up and down the line from Democrats..

    Finally, as to Bridge To Nowhere, Troopergate and the AIP...

    Democrats are treating these issues as if they were the coming of the Apocalypse.. All of the feigned indignation and other crap..

    Where was all of that BEFORE Palin became the VP nominee?? I mean, seriously.. If all of these things are as evil, perverse and nasty as Democrats make them out to be, why weren't they an issue before anyone KNEW of Palin??

    You see my point??

    95% of politics these days is nothing but political bigotry.

    And to deny it is simply to be part of the problem, NOT part of the solution..

    /RANT

    Michale.....
    Michale.....

  23. [23] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Why?

    Because Republicans can use this as a political issue.

    And from what I've seen, it does seem like there's some instances of individual misbehavior.

    But the evidence I see shows that the organization is trying to work to help correct this.

    Until you can show me some evidence that says otherwise, other than simply asserting that you're right, I believe it is mostly political hype.

    David

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    @David

    Because Republicans can use this as a political issue.

    Have you ever even CONSIDERED the possibility that it IS a legitimate political issue?

    Of course you haven't...

    I have shown you plenty of evidence. 8 different states. NUMEROUS investigations, NONE of which have been instigated by ACORN. ALL of which involve NUMEROUS incidents of fraud by MANY different individuals and supervisors..

    The fact is, you don't WANT to accept it..

    The fact also is, if ACORN was to Republicans what it is to Democrats, Democrats would be ALL OVER IT, screaming bloody murder. You wouldn't dismiss it as "hype" at all... You would be saying EXACTLY what I am saying now...

    The problem here is that you refuse to accept ANY evidence that claims ACORN is knowingly committing Voter Registration Fraud.

    Tell you what.

    You tell me what evidence you need to concede the point and I will find it. You give me a source that is objective and we'll go from there..

    Michale.....

  25. [25] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I'm not denying that there are individual instances of misbehavior. This is what the evidence I've seen shows. The instances are small, isolated, and certainly not what ACORN is advocating.

    And no voter fraud can actually occur w/ these fake registrations because ID is required. If one person is registered more than once, it doesn't mean they can vote more than once. Neither Democrats or Republicans benefit.

    To consider this a big issue, I would have to see 1) that one party is benefiting significantly from this. Or, I'd have to see 2) evidence that somehow ACORN as an organization is encouraging employees to submit fraudulent votes.

    Until I see this, it's a petty crime issue related to specific employees at ACORN. These individuals be punished according to the law.

    The number of phony registrations is in the thousands out of 1.3 million. Even if it's 10,000, this is less than .01%. They probably have as many applications which are just errors.

    Can you a) explain how either Democrats or Republicans get any more votes from this fraud, or b) show evidence that ACORN as an organization is advocating voter fraud.

    Evidence that would prove this:
    a) A credible source that explains how one party or other would get more votes; even if 10 registrations are submitted, a person can only vote once
    b) A documented source that shows somehow how ACORN is encouraging improper voter registration; an e-mail, an internal memo, the results of an investigation that have produced proof. Any article you can find that shows any actual evidence instead of simple accusations would be acceptable.

    And I will repeat that I am not denying these incidents occurred, but the accusations are way out of proportion to what seems to have actually happened.

    Bring it.
    David

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:


    I'm not denying that there are individual instances of misbehavior. This is what the evidence I've seen shows. The instances are small, isolated, and certainly not what ACORN is advocating.

    An yet, with ELEVEN states starting statewide investigations, how can you POSSIBLY claim that these are simple "individual instances of misbehavior"...

    Voter Registration Fraud from the SAME group in ELEVEN different states across the country??

    That simply CANNOT be anything less than a CO-ORDINATED effort at the National Level.

    It is simply NOT POSSIBLE to be anything BUT....

    And no voter fraud can actually occur w/ these fake registrations because ID is required.

    And yet, there are DOCUMENTED cases of voter fraud actually occurring. Dead people actually VOTING in Texas.. A citizen in New York who registered 73 times, voted...

    To consider this a big issue, I would have to see 1) that one party is benefiting significantly from this.

    And you wouldn't see that until AFTER the Democrats stole the election. Kinda "convenient" don't you think??


    Or, I'd have to see 2) evidence that somehow ACORN as an organization is encouraging employees to submit fraudulent votes.

    The fact that it is happening in ELEVEN different states across the country doesn't clue you in???

    How else could you explain it, if not a national co-ordinated effort???

    The number of phony registrations is in the thousands out of 1.3 million. Even if it's 10,000, this is less than .01%. They probably have as many applications which are just errors.

    Congrats. You have now just made the EXACT Republican argument to explain "fraud" in the 2006 elections...


    Can you a) explain how either Democrats or Republicans get any more votes from this fraud,

    Simple... During the hectic and stressful times of Voting Day, ID checks are lacksadaisal and in many cases, are FOUGHT (even in the courts) by Democrats..

    Do you see the connection???

    On the one hand, Democrats secure THOUSANDs and TENS of THOUSANDS of fraudulent registrations. On the OTHER Hand, Democrats go to court to PREVENT ID checks at voting stations..

    Gee, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the connection.. AND the benefit...


    a) A credible source that explains how one party or other would get more votes; even if 10 registrations are submitted, a person can only vote once

    I consider myself "credible" and I just explained, very logically and very rationally exactly how it would benefit Democrats..

    Michale....

  27. [27] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    How else could you explain it, if not a national co-ordinated effort???

    It is a national coordinated effort. By Republicans. ACORN is a nation wide group. Get a bunch of Republicans to legally challenge ACORN in a number of states or pressure those who can to do it for them. ACORN hires at about minimum wage. I'm sure this low level voter registration problem happens pretty much everywhere. Hand pick the states that have the highest numbers, maybe help by registering celebrity and obviously made up names that can be pulled out for later use. Boom. Instant smear campaign. Also instant smoke screen for the real voter fraud, voter roll purges of felons (and anyone who happens to have the same name) and those who have left foreclosed homes. Big problem in Michigan and a few other other states where law suites have been filed to prevent it. As far as I know no law suite has succeeded against ACORN though a few have succeeded against individuals who have worked for ACORN. Ask who does this whole thing help? Republicans. Very high probability that there is your guilty party.

  28. [28] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Michale,

    Have you voted recently? They check your name off a list once you vote. You can't vote more than once. This is a good thing.

    Can you cite a case where multiple registrations were submitted and somehow multiple votes got counted? Even one? That would at least be evidence.

    No evidence.

    Same with Ayers. No evidence.

    Same with the Reverend Wright. No evidence.

    Just angry assertion after assertion. LOUD ANGRY ASSERTIONS.

    I'm getting the sense that evidence isn't what you're looking for. You just want people to agree with you. You don't seem to care if there's any evidence or not.

    Maybe I should type more of my responses in ANGRY CAPITAL LETTERS. Would this help convince you?

    David

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Bashi

    How does the Republicans direct criminal investigations??

    The REPUBLICANS are not initiating investigations. County and State agencies are initiating investigations.

    I am simply gabberflasted that ya'all are actually DEFENDING all this fraud...

    @David

    Have you voted recently? They check your name off a list once you vote. You can't vote more than once. This is a good thing.

    Yes, Michale goes in and votes. Michale's name is checked. Then an hour or so later, "Mickey Mouse" goes in and "Mickey Mouse" votes. "Mickey Mouse"'s name is checked off. Then a couple hours later, "Tony Romo" goes in and votes. Then "Tony Romo"'s name is checked off.

    BUT.. Michale, Mickey Mouse and Tony Romo are ALL the same person.. And this is made possible by Democrats and there efforts to PREVENT ID checks at voting stations.

    Come on.. I KNOW that you are smarter than this. To try and make the claim that Voter Fraud is not possible..

    Can you cite a case where multiple registrations were submitted and somehow multiple votes got counted? Even one? That would at least be evidence.

    Yes, in New York.. A man registered multiple times thru ACORN and actually voted based on several of those registrations. I can't find the specific article off the top of my head, but when I do, I will post it.

    There is also the FACT that 2 women in Houston actually voted AFTER they were dead..

    How is this not VOTER Fraud???

    Regardless, even if one ISN'T found, the FACT that the chances of it happening (and those chances are growing every day) should be enough to PROVE beyond ANY partisan-induced doubt that this issue simply CANNOT be explained away as "hype"..

    Same with Ayers. No evidence.

    Ex Squeeze me?? No evidence??

    Once again, political bigotry shows it's ugly head and the FACTS are ignored..

    Ayers is a terrorist.. FACT

    Obama worked on at least 2 different boards with Obama.. FACT

    Obama socialized with Ayers on at least two different occasions.. FACT

    Now, if you can dispute these facts, I will provide you with the evidence to support these facts.

    As to evidence of Rev Wright, what exactly are you disputing about Rev Wright.

    You don't seem to care if there's any evidence or not

    Actually, facts are what I am all about...

    It is you who simply denies reality, based on political posturing.

    Go ahead. Dispute my facts.. I dare ya! :D

    Michale.....

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    By the bi...

    I noticed that you neglected to tell me which news orgainization you would find "credible", so I can pull ACORN/FRAUD reports from them.

    An oversight??

    Michale....

  31. [31] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    The REPUBLICANS are not initiating investigations. County and State agencies are initiating investigations.

    Republicans complain to state and county agencies who after a certain threshold start an investigation. Basic government 101. Investigations always take longer than election cycles, so their existence is more important than their conclusions.

    Every investigative news report from a reliable source, I've have read all come to the same conclusion: this is a non-story.

    Personally I am amazed you are falling for this classic election tactic and making a mountain out of a molehill.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Personally I am amazed you are falling for this classic election tactic and making a mountain out of a molehill.

    I WISH I could say I was "amazed" how much ya'all are trying to pooh pooh this away as nothing...

    But, we all know that your attitude is simply based on political bigotry..

    If ACORN had the connections to the GOP as they have to Democrats, you people would be screaming to high heaven.

    You know it..

    I know it...

    Michale.....

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Every investigative news report from a reliable source, I've have read all come to the same conclusion: this is a non-story.

    Could you post these "reliable" sources?

    I just want to confirm that they are not Huffington Post, Taylor Marsh or Daily Kos... :D

    Michale.....

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/31101144.html

    Get this..

    The Chief Of Elections for Ohio (A Democrat) is asking the SCOTUS to OVERTURN a lower court's ruling that would... are you ready for this??... FORCE the Elections Office to "do more to assist counties in confirm voter registrations".

    David, you wanted some info on how the registration fraud could POSSIBLY impact the elections??

    Here you have a Democrat who wants to LIMIT the help that her office gives to confirm voter registrations.

    This, despite the fact that

    "At least 200,000 newly registered voters have mismatched data, according to an initial review by Brunner's office."

    How ANYONE can claim this is a "non issue" is beyond belief...

    Michale.....

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93R8IE00&show_article=1

    About 200K Ohio voters have records discrepancies
    CINCINNATI (AP) - Close to one in every three newly registered Ohio voters will end up on court-ordered lists being sent to county election boards because they have some discrepancy in their records, an elections spokesman said Wednesday.

    These are the FACTS, ladies and gentlemen.. Not hype, not partisan bigotry. Nothing but FACTS...

    I don't care if you are Republican or Democrat, ANYONE who is not concerned about this simply has an ulterior agenda and doesn't care a whip about democracy or this country..

    Michale.....

  36. [36] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    The stories I watched/read (two were on tv) were from CNN, CBS and PBS.

    Here is a different view. It looks to me like the Republicans are making a mountain out of a molehill to pull some serious voter fraud sleaze. That using ACORN as an excuse to continue their voter purges and cause chaos and other problems at the polls. This is a problem but who is to blame, or how much each party is to blame, is not clear to me and probably won't be proven until after the election if ever.

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    CNN and CBS??

    'nuff said there...

    PBS?? Could you be more specific...

    Let's examine some indisputable facts.

    1. There is widespread Voter Registration going on.
    FACT

    2. ACORN, a clear Democratic Party sponsored orgainization, is at the forefront of the fraud allegations. FACT

    3. Democrats have gone to court all over the country to try and insure that there are NO I.D. checks done at Voting Stations. FACT

    Now, what logical and rational conclusions could be drawn from those indisputable facts??

    As to your "different view", let me ask you. If there is ANY question at all as to whether a person SHOULD be able to vote or not, shouldn't that person be PREVENTED from voting??

    What galls me about the entire thing is that you and David refuse to even concede that a problem exists. Ya'all pooh pooh it away as "hype" and GOP machinations...

    This, despite the overwhelming and NON-PARTISAN reports coming in regarding MILLIONS of voters possible votes from ALL over the country...

    I say again.. If this had been going on with ACORN being a GOP sponsored orgainization, you people would be screaming bloody murder..

    How is this not hypocritical??

    Michale.....

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    GRRRR

    Got ahead of myself there..

    "1. There is widespread Voter Registration going on.
    FACT"

    That SHOULD read, "1. There is widespread Voter Registration FRAUD going on.
    FACT"

    My bust...

    Michale.....

  39. [39] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    FACT - you are on a serious democrats are automatically guilty, republicans are blameless roll.

    FACT - Typing FACT (bonus points for all caps) does not automatically make something a fact.

    As to your "different view", let me ask you. If there is ANY question at all as to whether a person SHOULD be able to vote or not, shouldn't that person be PREVENTED from voting??

    Hell no. Voter disenfranchisement is evil. You accentually want to prevent an American citizen from voting because someone who was transferring hand written information from a form to a data base made a mistake? Very, very scary. Provisional ballet to be checked later. It's in the law. It's how it should be.

  40. [40] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Whoops. Actually want to prevent...

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    FACT - you are on a serious democrats are automatically guilty, republicans are blameless roll.

    Not at all... I readily concede that the hysterical Right is mean, nasty, underhanded and perverse.

    What YOU won't concede is that it's the same for the hysterical Left...

    In other words, you are trying to make the point that the Democrats are blameless and innocent in all this.

    Despite OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary...

    Hell no. Voter disenfranchisement is evil.

    And so is fraudulent voting...

    There is where we differ.. You seem to feel that fraudulent votes and registrations are perfectly OK if it favors Democrats.

    I feel that fraudulent votes and registrations should be stopped, REGARDLESS of who it benefits...

    Michale.....

  42. [42] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Despite OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary…

    Overwhelming eh? Your links: an opinion piece on the WSJ. Ohio.com which has a serious right lean in the comments and an AP piece which supports both possibilities. I look on google news: nothing unless I dig deep. Look on digg, even in the "2008 election" section: nothing unless I dig deep. Not only am I not OVERWHELMED by the evidence given, but the story looks as non-story fringe as I had originally thought.

    In other words, you are trying to make the point that the Democrats are blameless and innocent in all this.

    Uh...No. I've been trying to make the point this is the work of individuals mainly for greed and not a conspiracy of the party. Everything I've read/heard from the more center press seems to think so too.

    There is where we differ.. You seem to feel that fraudulent votes and registrations are perfectly OK if it favors Democrats.

    No, I follow election laws which as written happen to support my views. Convenient that.

  43. [43] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Heheh, Michale. Been in Canada the last couple days so had to get back into the thread. BTW Chris, the Canadian election was fascinating. I think their view of an election is about right. Read about the candidates a couple days before the election, then go vote.

    That seemed to be how most Canadians saw their election. There wasn't nearly the hype. Just research what the positions are and vote accordingly. Very orderly.

    Michale, feel free to commence w/ the Canadian jokes.

    Now back to the regularly schedule program.

    I guess you proved that Ayers and Obama were in the same room at the same time. Even Obama admits that and I think that's pretty strong evidence. So I'll give you that. But that doesn't prove anything else.

    What is it you're trying to say? That Ayers and Obama are somehow in a conspiracy? That Obama is a terrorist? Wait, you already said you didn't believe that. What exactly does them being in the same room a really long time ago prove?

    As to what makes a credible source, I'd say any article that stands up to objective journalistic standards is a credible source. You almost have to view on an article by article basis, though, because many papers put their pundits in with the news. Sometimes FOX has objective news, for example. It just takes a second to check some of the facts and sources to see how valid they are.

    As to your voter fraud argument, you've cited a couple cases, but I can't seem to find any sources for these. And even if there was one or two cases, does that merit the amount of outrage from conservatives? Why didn't they get upset about the lost votes in Florida? Enough lost votes to have actually mattered.

    Honestly, Michale. If I could see a case for institutional voter fraud (rather than a couple isolated cases), I would be as upset as you. But as I mentioned before, the margin of error here is less than .001 %. And that's just for the registrations. Let's say I give you the 3 cases of voter fraud for 1.3 million registrations even w/o any evidence. That is less than .0000001 %. Statistically, I'm not even sure if any measures would be able to improve much on that.

    So I think conservatives are screaming because they've got nothing else.
    - David

    p.s. I'm glad there's widespread voter registration going on ;)

    p.s.s. I thought you used to like Obama. What happened? Just being contrarian?

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Bashi

    Overwhelming eh? Your links: an opinion piece on the WSJ.

    Actually, there are TONS of links. I just know that it takes a while to get posted.

    Google ACORN and FRAUD and you'll have 1 million, five hundred and 40 thousand links...

    I think CW would whack my pee-pee if I posted them here..

    Uh…No. I've been trying to make the point this is the work of individuals mainly for greed and not a conspiracy of the party.

    Yea, and I suppose you believe that WWII was just a couple greedy and disgruntled Germans and Japanese and that was it. :^/

    So, let me see if I understand you correctly.

    We have investigations going on in ELEVEN different states with the common denominator being ACORN, a Democrat front organization..

    We have the Democratic Party going to state courts NATIONWIDE to prevent ID checks at polling stations.

    These two FACTS seem to preclude your assertion that these are just some greedy individuals with no Party involvement.

    @David

    Michale, feel free to commence w/ the Canadian jokes.

    Most of my Canadian Jokes center around Rodney McKay, which you probably wouldn't get. :D

    I guess you proved that Ayers and Obama were in the same room at the same time.

    No, I proved that Ayers and Obama worked and socialized together on numerous occasions. Something that you initially denied..

    Change the name Ayers to Bin Laden or McVeigh or Dahlmer or Bundy or Manson and you can understand why non-partisan people have a problem with it.

    What is it you're trying to say? That Ayers and Obama are somehow in a conspiracy?

    No, I am saying that Obama has not fully disclosed the relationship/association/whatever. In an attempt to explain it away, the Obama campaign LIED about it. I am saying that Obama needs to do with Ayers what he did with Rev Wright.

    The fact that Obama DOESN'T do this, despite a history of hitting these issues head on and making them NON issues, is what has me concerned.

    Why doesn't Obama address this issue like he did Rev Wright?? Is there something about it that he doesn't want us to know??

    THAT is the only explanation that makes ANY kind of logical sense..

    Sometimes FOX has objective news, for example.

    Had to re-read this one a couple times to make sure it said what I thought it said! :D

    There is hope for you after all.. :D

    Honestly, Michale. If I could see a case for institutional voter fraud (rather than a couple isolated cases), I would be as upset as you.

    OK... Now we're getting somewhere...

    As I told BASHI above, GOOGLE ACORN and Fraud.. Once you sift thru all the GOP propaganda crap and the DEM self-serving denial crap, you are left with HUNDREDS of objective reports of Voter Registration Fraud across the country.

    How ANYONE can simply write this off as individual actions is beyond me.

    Put it another way. If the Voter Registration Fraud instances were cases of bubonic plague, would you consider them all unrelated?? If the Voter Registration Fraud instances were incidents of vandalism against Democratic Party Offices, would you consider them all unrelated??

    Of course you wouldn't..

    So, I ask.. Logically and rationally, how can ALL these hundreds of instances of Voter Fraud and Voter Registration fraud be considered "individual" or isolated cases.

    It simply defies the laws of logic and is ONLY possible under a massive suspension of rational thought..

    Let's say I give you the 3 cases of voter fraud for 1.3 million registrations even w/o any evidence. That is less than .0000001 %. Statistically, I'm not even sure if any measures would be able to improve much on that.

    And yet, in an Ohio county, 1 in 3 Voter Registrations are fraudulent...

    Would Democrats stand still for that if such a fraudulent favored REPUBLICANS??

    Of course not...

    p.s. I'm glad there's widespread voter registration going on ;)

    Bite me! ;D hehehehehehe

    p.s.s. I thought you used to like Obama. What happened? Just being contrarian?

    Oh, nothing much has changed with my opinion of Obama. I AM concerned as to why he won't come clean about Ayers as he did with Rev Wright. The simple fact that Obama is KNOWN for that, but refuses to do it in the Ayers case has me a little concerned. But I still intend to vote for Obama. Just not as enthusiastically as I was before..

    No, I just hate the hypocrisy in general. And this election, the Democrats have that in spades..

    It just seems that this election, more than any other is nothing but a hypocritical exercise in futility..

    I guess I am too over-exposed to the Hysterical Left Wing Hate Machine, it has me cynical and defensive..

    Yea, I know.. I know.. The hysterical Right has their own Hate Machine as well. But they are the hysterical Right. That is to be EXPECTED from them. And, by and large, the hysterical Right doesn't profess to be anything different.

    I can forgive a LOT of transgressions if the person/group is at least honest about things.

    The GOP doesn't pretend to be as pure as the driven snow.

    The Democratic Party DOES, even though they are as bad as the GOP in things..

    But, I will say that it's likely that, barring a national catastrophe, Obama will be our President (GOOD) and the Democratic Party will probably have a super majority (VERY BAD) in Congress.

    It WILL be interesting to see if Democrats can make good on ALL the promises they have made when they said, "If only we had CONTROL of Congress" (Pre-2006) and "If only we had a Veto Proof Majority"(Post-2006).

    You can bet that I'll be around holding the Dems feet to the fire and watching their every move like a hawk and crowing (I guess we're into birds now..:D ) incessantly at every misstep, every broken promise and every lie the Democratic Party will make.

    It's going to be a "fun" 4-8 years... I just hope this country survives...

    Michale.....

  45. [45] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Google ACORN and FRAUD and you'll have 1 million, five hundred and 40 thousand links…

    A classic case of volume not equaling quality. I've done that search a few times while responding to this thread. Most are extremely biased conservative or liberal blogs. On the rare link to a real news source I get stories like This or this.

    Yea, and I suppose you believe that WWII was just a couple greedy and disgruntled Germans and Japanese and that was it. :^/

    Of course not! You forgot the greedy and disgruntled Italian!

    We have investigations going on in ELEVEN different states with the common denominator being ACORN, a Democrat front organization..

    We have the Democratic Party going to state courts NATIONWIDE to prevent ID checks at polling stations.

    I laid out how it could have just as easily been the republicans above...

    ID checks is a different issue that needs to be hammered out by congress or at least state legislatures. It has much more to it beyond ACORN and is a ideological issue being fought out between the two parties.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    A classic case of volume not equaling quality.

    You claimed I have only one link.. I showed you over a million.

    Yes, you have the GOP propaganda links. You also have the Democrat propaganda links..

    Ignoring those, you still have HUNDREDS of objective, impartial links outlining the problem..

    The ones you chose?? Miami and Seattle?? Hell, why not throw in San Francisco too... Might as well make it a Liberal trifecta...

    >I>Of course not! You forgot the greedy and disgruntled Italian!

    Touche.. :D

    I laid out how it could have just as easily been the republicans above…

    Exactly.. And, if it were, YOU would be screaming bloody murder... Just like Democrats screamed SERIAL KILLER when 2 right wing nutjob scumbags attacked liberal groups 15 days apart...

    ID checks is a different issue that needs to be hammered out by congress or at least state legislatures. It has much more to it beyond ACORN and is a ideological issue being fought out between the two parties.

    But surely you can see how it plays into the whole Registration Fraud..

    I mean, you SHOULD be able to see it, if you were non-partisan..

    By not having I.D. checks, I can walk into a voting station, say, "I'm Tony Romo.. I registered a while back." and then I could vote Democrat.. Then, I can walk into a DIFFERENT voting station, say, "I am Mickey Mouse.. I registered a bit ago" and I could vote Democrat AGAIN...

    How can you fail to see the connection between NO I.D. checks and registration fraud??

    I honestly don't believe anyone could NOT see such a connection. I can only assume that ya'all don't WANT to see the connection...

    Michale.....

  47. [47] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    You claimed I have only one link.. I showed you over a million.

    Yes, you have the GOP propaganda links. You also have the Democrat propaganda links..

    Ignoring those, you still have HUNDREDS of objective, impartial links outlining the problem..

    I never said anything about any number of links. I pointed out your 3 links were either partisan or could support both views. Most of those HUNDREDS of objective links echo exactly what I've been saying...

    The ones you chose?? Miami and Seattle?? Hell, why not throw in San Francisco too… Might as well make it a Liberal trifecta…

    They were the first two I came across. Miami on page one, Seattle on page two...Not hand picked for bias.

    How can you fail to see the connection between NO I.D. checks and registration fraud??

    I honestly don't believe anyone could NOT see such a connection. I can only assume that ya'all don't WANT to see the connection…

    Uh...have you read today's SCOTUS opinion on the subject?

  48. [48] 
    akadjian wrote:

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/17/america/vote.php

    Interesting. Thanks, Bashi. Though reading through the politics of it, I'm not sure if it excites me all that much. They seemed to have dismissed it on a technicality, rather than making a decision.

    And Michale, believe it or not, I share your concern about the Democratic party. They need reform as much as anyone. Though we'd probably disagree on direction.

    As for Ayers. Couple things. You're right that Obama should say he has nothing to do with Ayers. And he has said this. He said it again the other night during the debate. But why make a big deal out of such a tenuous connection? It's like saying Bush is linked to bin Laden because he's been to Afghanistan.

    Peace brutha, Michale. As always it's been fun. Think we've about beaten this to death and I'd rather focus my time on getting the big "O" elected than beating him up.

    - David

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    @David

    And Michale, believe it or not, I share your concern about the Democratic party.

    Hallelujah!!!! :D

    They need reform as much as anyone. Though we'd probably disagree on direction.

    Actually, I bet we wouldn't..

    Democrats need to stop acting like Republicans...

    As for Ayers. Couple things. You're right that Obama should say he has nothing to do with Ayers. And he has said this. He said it again the other night during the debate. But why make a big deal out of such a tenuous connection? It's like saying Bush is linked to bin Laden because he's been to Afghanistan.

    Did Bush sit down to drinks and socialize with Bin Laden? Did Bush work on several board of directors with Bin Laden? No?? Then the comparison doesn't work..

    From my travails, I have come to the conclusion that there are two camps of the Terrorist Pooh Pooh groups.

    One camp believes that Ayers is not a terrorist so any connection between Ayers and Obama is no big deal and is rendered moot...

    The other camp believes that Ayers IS a terrorist, but that the connections between Ayers and Obama are so tenuous that it's a non issue..

    You seem to be in the second group. But your position is very easy to refute.. Don't feel bad for your selection, though. The first group's position is also easy to refute as there is no doubt that Ayers IS a terrorist and, as it has been established, there is no such thing as "nice" terrorists.

    In your case, I would ask you to change AYERS' name to BIN LADEN. Or MANSON. Or DAHLMER. Or BUNDY. Or GACY.

    Now, if Obama had the SAME kinds of "tenuous" connections to any of those people as he has to Ayers, would your "tenuous connections" argument hold water?

    Of course not.. Because ANY voluntary connections to scumbags like Bin Lade or Manson or Dahlmer or Bundy or Gacy would be completely unacceptable.

    Wouldn't you agree?? Of course you would. Any logical or rational person would HAVE to agree...

    Ergo, your "tenuous" argument doesn't hold water.

    Peace brutha, Michale. As always it's been fun. Think we've about beaten this to death and I'd rather focus my time on getting the big "O" elected than beating him up.

    Barring a catastrophic terrorist attack or the like, I doubt that there is anything that can stop an Obama
    Presidency. No work necessary..

    Where the WORK comes in is to make it very clear to Democrats that the American people have given them (or WILL give them) a very unique opportunity to make each and every American's lives better...

    They better be up to the challenge...

    Michale.....

  50. [50] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I'll go ahead and see your significant amount of quatloos and raise you the mother lode of quatloos that this election is anything but close...to the point where even any significant amount of vote fraud will be rendered a moot point...

    ...or you can call me a wishcaster, extraordonaire.

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Elizabeth

    Done.. :D

    Michale.....

Comments for this article are closed.