The Reverend:

Actually, it is the Democrats who are REALLY insulting their intelligence, by claiming they were too stupid to understand how to vote.

Useless:

Here, I agree just as strongly with The Reverend!! If an elderly person can manage to run four Bingo cards at a time, then it becomes very difficult for me to accept that they could not figure out a single Ballot.

What is also troubling is the fact that while The Democrats were screaming "Count Every Vote!!", it was the Democrats who fought to have the ballots of Floridian Military personnel serving overseas excluded from the count. Their hypocrisy in this case was simply undeniable.

GolfHobo::

The Reverend:

Sure they did - with several Ohio counties in 2004.

Useless:

There were many exit polls conducted in Ohio, and in parts of other states as well, that clearly indicated Kerry as the winner; yet, mysteriously, the final vote tally favored Bush.

GolfHobo:

Useless:

With respect to this matter, I agree with Golf Hobo; the history of politics here in Texas, and other states as well, has clearly borne truth to that statement

The Reverand:

News flash: An independent group went in AFTER the supreme court ruled, and found that Bush had indeed won in that county.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_2000
Useless:

Here again, The Reverend is correct in his historical accounting of events. Now remember, I voted for Bush in 2000, but I hold no illusions that the Supreme Court's decision here was made in anything but the interest of political loyalties and convenient expediency.

This was a case where The Supreme Court was not final because they were right, they simply had the right to make the final decision. In my opinion, it was one of the most divisive and erroneous decisions that they ever made.

Sadly, I don't think that there can be any question or doubt that both parties have used and abused their power and influence in order to steal elections. The debates over election rigging and stealing have now degenerated into the pots calling the kettles black!! In the end, our Constitution suffers, and we, The American People, loose; yet we, The American People are guilty of allowing it to happen, decrying abuse when things don't blow our way, and looking the other way when stolen elections result in our respective parties or candidates prevailing ( I deliberately choose the term "prevailing" over the term "winning") at the polls.

 

quote="golfhobo":

It can't be JUST that you hate Dems, cuz even YOU realize that most Dems had no problems in every other county in America?

And I'm sure there were other counties in which the majority demographic was old Jewish people. So, what was the difference? Could it be the ballot design?[/quote]

RoadKing2525:

Is this guy a racists?

I suspect this GOLF GUY dropped out at 3rd grade.

Could we please have this guy banned due to stupidity?

He is taking up space and breathing my air!

Get a clue dude, try watching Popeye cartoons. Get a clue![/quote]

RoadKing2525:

Here you are a :shock: 6 Post Wonder :shock: (at the time of this reply to your posting) who has been a member of CAD for less than a week, calling for another member to be banned simply because you disagree with him?? He's breathing YOUR air???

Get over yourself, Dude!! You simply are not the hot shot you make yourself out to be!!!

Look, I don't agree with GolfHobo's remark about Jewish people, nor do I understand what prompted him to drag Jews into the equation, nor do I understand what exactly he meant by that remark. Perhaps he will explain what he meant.

Sometimes, Golfhobo and I agree, sometimes, we don't!!! The same could be said for Reverend Vassago, Fozzy, Bandit's Cousin, Uturn2001, Windwalker, One, Ardmore Farms Forever, Rokk, Yooper, and many other members here as well; sometimes they argree with each other, and other times, they don't!! In any event, they took the time to become a part of the group instead trying to barge in and run the group, as demonstrated by your calling for an established member to be banned, and complaining that they are breathing YOUR air!!!

You, on the other hand, have not !!!

There is a Fraternal Culture at work here; we want to welcome new members, and certainly, we invite them to participate in questions, answers, and discussions, agree, or disagree!!. At the same time, when it comes to the more heated discussions where we tend to "get in each others face", we have been menbers here for a while, and have taken the time and effort to get to know each other.

You, on the other hand, have not.

You are mighty wet behind the ears here to be blasting in with your own brand of insulting arrogance. So, why don't you just drop back and lurk untill you can learn a few manners, and work on becomming a part of the group before you come in trying to take over.

It seems that we have had a recent influx of some Sophomoric Self Styled "Experts" (does the handle "MYTH_BUSTER" ring a bell??) who have confused CAD with Truckers.net!!

Get a Clue, Dude!!! Get a Clue!! :wink:

UPDATE:

Six Postings, and no less that two warnings from the moderator!!!
Looks like your days here are numbered!!

 

Interesting conversation you guys have going on here...

With that being said I do believe the Rev. has summed up my thoughts exactly

 

And I don't even like the President all that much. :wink:

 

Useless: Thank you for standing up for me even while disagreeing with me at times. You are free to do so without fear that I will blast you or insult you as some here find it necessary to do to me, because you have class and make your points without calling names. But, don't worry, I do not cower from those who do.

Thanks for taking care of my "light work" with the noobie. I would LOVE to correct his (3rd grade) spelling and compare credentials with him, but it wouldn't be a fair fight.

And, yes, I WILL explain my reference to the Jews for you and anyone interested.

At 12:09pm today, I addressed Fozzy and the Rev together (since they had joined sides) to simply explain my concerns about fair voting rights. In response, Fozzy insulted the elderly, mostly Jewish, population of Palm Beach County, and said they were NOT disenfranchised. The Rev later joined in this illusion, and said that we are not afforded the right to understand the voting process or ballot. He gave his 100% validation of this. I try to stay away from such ABSOLUTE statements, because we can ALL be somewhat wrong at times... well all of us but the Rev!

When I gave him an example of his faulty reasoning, and started questioning his motives, because I really couldn't understand the basis for his discrimination against this particular group of American Citizens with a right to vote.... Fozzy responded in the only manner he seems capable of. Insulting my emotional state, and lumping my rational statements in with what he calls "THEY."

Skipping over your expected response to "JR," (and forgive me, but I can't get into THAT election discussion at this time,) we come to the Rev's response. At least, he is generally more sophisticated and usually backs up his argument. However, in this case he is mistaken, in more ways than one.

First, I would NEVER post something that I thought would "prove his point." If he had seriously researched the events of the Palm Beach election, he'd know that NONE of these things (except the confusing sample ballot) were afforded the voters there. I will offer proof in my conclusion (if he will take the time to read it.)

He said, and you agreed (for some reason,) that it was in fact, the Dems who were insulting their intelligence. A quick review of this thread will show that it was he and Fozzy who have said the Dems in Palm Beach Co. were too stupid to vote properly. The Dems have only said that the ballot was confusing and didn't conform to state law. (more later.) "They" have said the voters there were too Old, or too stupid to understand the ballot, and therefore somehow relinquished their right to vote.

This led me to ask whether they just despised Old people, who MIGHT get a little confused by an "irregular" ballot, or was their another reason. Yes, I asked if they were racist against Jews. I couldn't think of any other reason. Although, many of the voters in that county are also black. But, I really just couldn't believe they wanted to disenfranchise them simply because they were old and not as sharp as some of us.

Why the question of Jews? Simple. Everyone knows that the demographics in that county are predominantly Older, Jewish, Black and/or Democratic. So, it was known they would vote heavily democratic, but in this particular election, it could also be expected that there would be a HIGHER turnout for the Dem ticket because the Vice Presidential candidate was Joe Lieberman.... a Jew. Republicans feared the outcome of the state, and therefore the entire election because of the large numbers of Jewish Americans living in Florida and especially in this county.

I certainly am NOT racist. I had a "second" set of parents I call my adoptive parents that were Jewish. I, in turn, have also been "adopted" by a Jewish family in Colorado. But, I am a realist and it certainly extends to the political arena. The Republicans KNEW this race could easily come down to Florida, and the Dems had "conveniently" selected a Jew as a V.P. candidate. Those are the facts.

Although, I questioned this as a motive, I didn't want to believe it. And I pointed out that there were other areas of the country with heavy Jewish demographics, so the only thing else (if they were not blaming the lack of intelligence on the Jewish old folks,) was the ballot design. Which has been my point all along. (more later.)

Whether the ballot was approved by both parties' representatives is immaterial, since the Democrat who designed it was basically a Republican sympathizer who ONLY registered as a Democrat for the purpose of getting the position. This is undisputed, as she admits it.

As for the "independant" reviews of the recounts (of the ALLOWED ballots,) I'm well aware of the fact that they are inconclusive... some show Gore the winner, others show Bush, both by relatively SMALL margins. I've read that entire article. Word for word, and hit many of the associated links. What the Rev is missing is not limited to, but primarily, the OVERvotes that were thrown out.. and therefore NOT recounted... because of the ballot design that gave some 2,000 or more votes to Buchanan than he could possibly have gotten by voter intention.

THIS is the main reason I claim they were disenfranchised, and that the election was "coerced" if not stolen. But, it is not my ONLY argument. (more later.)

I am not engaged in a "tirade" against Republicans here. I was attempting to have a rational discussion about the voting process that failed us in 2000, and without doubt, will continue to disabuse us of our voting rights.

Useless, you used the bingo example as to why you felt you had to agree with the Reverend. But, in fact, I hope to show that this is actually evidence supporting MY belief that the elderly in Palm Beach Co. were confused by the ballot PRECISELY because it did not follow established and expected patterns. (more later.)

Okay... I guess it is now "later." But, this post is long enough for now. That's NOT a copout. If necessary, I will give you my full dissertation of what happened in that election, but I think MOST of the points that I would make can be found in the following link. Again, I might point out that I found this link ONLY tonight, AFTER I made assertions concerning what I remembered from the time, and KNOW to have happened.

I think I can count on Useless, and HOPEFULLY the Rev, to read the entire document. It looks long, but can be read quickly if you sort of skip over all the legal precedents cited.... yet realize they are there.... and try NOT to skip over the important material. I doubt Fozzy will take the time, since it is a bit more complicated than a Fisher Price toy, and I'm quite sure "the noobie" doesn't have the education to follow it. But, it DOES address nearly every argument I have made concerning legal precedent for FAIR VOTING rights, and the mandate to afford them, as well as the events that conspired on election day to "disenfranchise" the voters of Palm Beach county.

I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR the objections to the fact that the suit was brought by the ACLU. Your objections are duly NOTED. Regardless of what some of you think of them, they ARE lawyers who have spent their lives studying laws, especially election laws. They know much more than any of US, and they present a cogent and persuasive argument.

The first two paragraphs, where they give their credentials, can be skipped. A few references to other elections can be quickly skimmed over, but don't ignore their relevance. And any reference to "parallax views" of the ballots can be skipped, as I don't think that is material. But, their explanation of the ballot design, and its POTENTIAL for erroneous votes, can not be denied. And their argument for the fact that there should have been, and could have been a RE-VOTE, as I have suggested, is convincing.

To those of you who care enough to spend the 10 minutes or so needed to read it, I salute you. To anyone who won't.... well.... quit breathing my AIR!!! :roll:

http://election2000.stanford.edu/acluamicus.html


Hobo

I apologize for the ONE instance where I misspelled "there." I can't seem to find it now to correct it, although i saw it in my proofread. Heck... nobody's perfect! :lol:

 

I did not know nor care what religion these people were in this specific county that you are now whining about. YOU (as all good liberals do) have tried to micro-manage people into special classes and groups instead of just allowing the chips to fall where they may. YOU are now playing the "jew card" because in the last fray you have asserted some of us to be Nazis. You are now playing the "I can be racist because I have a black/jewish friend" card. This is so typical of your type.

When I said that just because someone is too stupid to figure out a ballot, that they are not "disinfranchised" it was a general term meant for EVERY city, county, State et al. You keep thrashing around though, eventually you'll figure out how silly and desperate this is making you look.

 

First mistake right there. I am on nobody's side except my own.

Under the US constitution, no - we aren't. And I will now support my arguement:

There is an increasing amount of people of Hispanic origin in this country that do not speak or read English. By your arguement, the Government should be printing ballots in EVERY language, in an attempt to prevent voters from being disenfranchised. However, this is not in the Constitution, and wasn't in the Constitution in November of 2000.

The constitution is absolute.

With all due respect, those people WERE afforded their constitutional right to vote.

Nope - I said that the Democrats were insulting the voters of Palm Beach by claiming they couldn't understand a simple ballot, even when people were on hand to help any voter who was confused. That is an OPINION.

I did this quick review of the thread, and found NOWHERE that I stated that anyone was too stupid to vote properly. Please cite the quote where I said this, or retract it.

Again, I never said that. I stated that there is no provision under the law to guarantee that every voter understands the ballot, just as there is no provision under the law to guarantee that every voter understands the positions of the person they are voting for.

But, if the ballot didn't conform to State law, then why wasn't this brought up BEFORE the election?

You were, and still are, looking to justify this in any way possible. But there are several facts that are getting in the way:

1. There were people on hand to help anyone who was confused
2. The ballot in question was designed by a Democrat, and was approved by both the Republican AND Democrat party
3. The recount proved that Bush STILL would have won
4. Bush won a majority of the ballots cast under the rules in place on election day.

That is mere speculation. There is no proof to justify this.

You are right - it was a vast Right-Wing conspiracy. Better tighten up your tinfoil hat. :lol:

No, those are not the facts. If you think they are, support your arguement with an outside source.

A design that was created by a Democrat.

So now she is a "pretend" Democrat. Kind of like how Condeleeza Rice is a "pretend" black. :roll:

You are right though - she WAS a Republican, PRIOR TO 1979, due largely to the fact that her father was a Republican. She then changed her party affilitation to INDEPENDENT, until a party registered under that name. She then changed to NO PARTY AFFILIATION. In 1995, she changed her party affiliation to Democrat, because Jackie Winchester, the Palm Beach County supervisor of elections, was resigning, and had hand picked her to succeed her. After the 2000 election, she changed her affiliation to NO PARTY AFFILIATION.

But the fact remains that she was elected to that office by the voters - those same voters who were supposedly able to understand her positions, and weren't disenfranchised (yet).

Teresa LePorte history

Again - pure spectulation. You have no way of proving this without being a psychic.

You certainly are on a tirade against Republicans, and it shows. By your using of words such as "racist" and "sympathizer".

There is no provision in any of the laws that states that the ballot must follow "expected patterns".

You are linking to the lawsuit that the ACLU filed. Not a very reliable source, I might add.

Oops - too late. :lol:

I read the document, and it was full of references to media stories of people who claimed to be disenfranchised. These claims were never proven.

The fact of the matter is: Bush won the election based upon the voting rules that were in place AT THE TIME OF THE ELECTION. Whether these rules were wrong doesn't matter - they were the rules.

 

 

Dang, Rev. I wish you wouldn't use a Line by Line veto process. It makes for a LONG post to refute you. Perhaps, you could learn to summarize a bit, and make your objections in the form of a paragraph.

 

Wierd, what you said about Hobo, is kinda what I though about 'YOUR KIND', but didnt want to resort to low blows wich seems to be your desperate attempt to discredit anyone critical of the BUSH AUTOCRACY due to lack of substance to counter the good points made...

I cant keep up with yall and 'hyperquote' after 36 hrs of not sleeping and a mieserly 500 miles behind me, But I still managed to check whats in the news and, as usual ran across something fitting. Enjoy and HERE WE GO AGAIN!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101901818.html