Voter fraud - American election vastly corrupted
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Monday, January 27, 2025 00:47
VIEWED: 29159
PAGE 13 of 16
Quote:
Originally posted by Unicorn:
Not everybody who believes the election could have been stolen is irrational.
Holding a belief despite a preponderance of evidence to the contrary is irrational.
There is no such thing as a weed.
...and you too. Let's see...Cntl/Alt/D...Virtual dope-slap delivered.
Y'all are gonna be nice today, even if I have to VDS you into virtual unconsciousness.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think the VDS belongs to Hero, who first introduced the genteel phrase "psycho BushHaters stuck in a fantasy world where AlGore is President and Osama bin Ladden is a humanitarian."
And so my award goes to HERO, for taking this line of discussion to a new low. And I'm retroactively removing the VDS from Ghoulman and Unicorn, who really didn't deserve them. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
And I'm retroactively removing the VDS from Ghoulman and Unicorn, who really didn't deserve them.
Wow, you guys are big on rewriting history.
And you wanted a draft. And you wanted the courts to step in and change the election results, and you don't want free speech, and you are against heterosexual marriage, and you want to raise everbody's taxes, deny health coverage to the rich, kill puppies in the name of cats, eat snails, ban beer in football stadiums, deny ketchup to millions of school kids, hug trees, deny hugs to SUV's, turn off Fox News, turn on Bill Clinton, turn in George Bush, turn over American soveriegnty, turn up the number of abortions, and turn down the chance to spread liberty to the Muslim world.
I've heard some Democrats say y'all need a new message, truth is y'all need new values. There's millions of Red state Democrats, like myself (being a Republican don't mean I aint a Democrat), who'd fight hard for a Democratic candidate that shared our values. Aint seen one since...maybe Truman, since I aint claiming Carter. He had all the right values, but knew peanuts about runnin a country. Now Reagan, there was a President the Red Democrats could love.
Me, I just live and let live, fight for what's right, work hard, play rough, and don't settle for second best. Thats why I almost always win and never really lose.
So take your pansy blue helemted, French licking, Starbucks coffee drinking, Vermont Teddy Bear ordering, luxery towncar driving, blue blooded, ivy league, liberal close minded elitisist VDS and stick right next to your virtual desktop stripper. I prefer the real thing. May be Bush League, but we gets the job done
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
It's been a few days and George W. Bush has been declared the winner of the 2004 Presidential election... by the media.
Now the media is commited to "healing" instead of doing thier job - checking for fraud.
In an election that has brought out more Americans to punch thier vote since 1968 it is the shame of America that each and every vote wasn't counted, worse, many votes were simply destroyed in a cruel and fascistic campaign by many Republicans to steal an election they feared would go very badly for them.
This is really silly nonsense. Please stop making the Democratic party look bad.
It's plain the election is a fraud.
The line-ups for voting were a joke.
The Diebold voting machines are a joke.
The police prevented hundreds from voting.
Voters were prevented from voting at the booths.
Fake lists of people were created to prevent voting.
Poor areas were closed to voting.
Minority areas were closed to voting.
University voting booths were "stolen".
The list of stories about fraud go on and on. You might think these are the usual incidents... but voting isn't difficult, it shouldn't have any problems. If there are problems... THAT'S A PROBLEM! But this logic fails American media who are ordered to support thier man George W. Bush.
Worse... there is no controling election body to officially count votes and insure the count, rather like every other democratic government on the planet. Three Republican dominated corporations control over 80% of the vote count in the United States: Sequoia Voting Systems Inc; Electronic Systems & Software Inc. (ES&S); and Diebold" Inc.
... and the stories keep coming out. The number one issue Americans will not see on thier TVs, but the rest of the world will see, is the incredible corruption of the 2004 US Election.
Your vote didn't count.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer,
You miss my meaning, Friend.
There is a huge amount of evidence that the vote was hacked in counties and other areas where e-voting took place without any paper trail or other means of verifying the numbers. The numbers in only those places are completely mismatched between the polling data and the actual results; nowhere else were the results as skewed as in those particular places.
The consistent polling data showed Kerry up by a large margin in those areas where discrepencies were noted, while the vote as counted consistently showed higher numbers for Bush.
In my statement which was deliberately open-ended, I said that it is irrational to believe something when there is a preponderance of evidence to the contrary. By that measure it would be irrational for me to trust my government to accurately represent me at all. By that measure, I have heard a great many facts spun until they were unrecognizeable, splashing, fountain-like, from the froth at the top of this administration, so I have a fairly strong idea that they care less about the truth or the voters than they care about winning and expanding their power. I mean come on, "The environment has never been cleaner"? Did anybody believe Bush when he said that?
As I have posted previously,
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm
this is a good site to read more about all that.
Before I accept your dope slap, you should understand that those of us who wanted change for our country read this information from multiple non-crazed sources and feel cheated, because the evidence here supports the notion that the Bushies were willing to cheat in order to win, if not at a national level, then at least repeatedly on a more local scale, and there _were_ documented cases of organized disenfranchising in (I think it was 11) numerous states by a supposedly reputable group with strong ties to the Republicans.
It's very disheartening to all of us that nobody higher up seems to care about the appearence of fraud; if they really won fair and square, they should be willing to make sure every vote is counted and counted correctly when there are so many of us calling for it. They should be bending over backwards at a national level to find any sort of cheating and put an immediate and very public stop to it. They're calling for our unity, but they refuse to represent us to the best of their abilities. In fact they've made repeated attempts to bury any evidence that doesn't make them look good.
Those of us in the Kerry camp fear for our inalienable rights. This election saw nationwide attacks on sexual freedom across the board; when did Senators and Presidents become a fixture in the bedroom? This freedom, this privacy, this representation, _has_ been stolen from us if there is no one in the winners' circle who will fight for us, who will bother to make sure it's all kosher, who will look at credible sources and take them seriously instead of trying to discredit them with spun half-truths.
Mr. Bush is completely surrounded by people who agree with everything he says, or everything Cheney says. He never hears from the other _half_ of his constituents, and as far as we can tell, he never even tries.
So you can send me the dope slap, but honestly I didn't feel it, because I think you missed.
(I've done enough stupid things to recognize that particular sensation, after all.)
There is no such thing as a weed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, I have a question for all of you. This is a little off topic, and a little on. Ok, here goes: The 2000 election was close. Too close. Ok, fine enough. Bush kinda won, kinda didn't. Let's not get into that. Ok, he won the 2004 election. Ok, some people think that it was rigged, others don't. Here's the question: Why, if you are really "in control" of the way votes are counted and can control the outcome of an election, would you allow somebody like Bill Clinton to win office, two successive terms??? I can assure you that both times he won, there were problems with the voting, there were issues with fraud. Do you know why it wasn't news? It's because the race wasn't close. He won. Just as Bush won this time around. If the people "in control" were really "in control" then Bush the first would have had two terms. The people got sick of him, and wanted Clinton. How much did you hear people complaining that Clinton won when he did? Some, not much, but some.
I will admit that there were people (on both political sides) that tried to make votes disappear, disenfranchise voters, rig the vote. It wasn't only Republicans doing it.
Also, the media is a liberal medium (except for Fox, which is weird cause they used to be the worst).
They want Americans to have as much unprotected sex with multiple partners that have differant diseases while smoking cigarettes and dope so that they can make us a country of "victims" so that they can gain votes and power. They gain power and say to themselves "Look what I've done for myself. Screw everybody else, this is about ME!!" (Ted Kennedy is a wonderful example of that attitude!)
On the other side, the Republican party tries to believe that they are the "compassionate" party that tries to help others help themselves. While that is an admirable goal, they fail miserably when they only do things that fuel their self-interest. They gain the power and say to themselves "Wow, look at me, I am making descisions that will affect BILLIONS of peoples lives!! I'm going to start a war!!"
Hopefully, soon, people will wake up and realize that neither group is the one that is going to help this country. It's kinda like being in a country where the Nazi's are running against the Marxists....... Whomever wins, we all lose!!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The religious right and the non-religious right have been working towards this ascendancy for the past two decades (or more) and the political balance of power doesn't remain static. Something seriously changed during Clinton's terms in office- the right wing took over the Republican Party and tipped that balance. I can give several indicators of the change:
The religious right claimed, openly and proudly, to have taken over the entire Republican Party in Texas at all levels: county, state, and national.
The Republicans and Ken Star pursued Clinton with a vicious single-mindedness that hadn't been seen in Presidential politics for over 60 years.
Dole's candidacy revealed the split between the "moderate" Republicans and the more right-wing kind, and his failure to win office gave the right-wing the green light to play out their scenario. (The same thing might happen as a result of Kerry's failure.)
Just because someone's in power now doesn't mean they were always in power, or that they will remain in power ad infinitum. After all, even The Nazis started w/o power and (thankfully) ended w/o power.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, BTW
"They {liberals} want Americans to have as much unprotected sex with multiple partners that have differant diseases while smoking cigarettes and dope so that they can make us a country of "victims" so that they can gain votes and power."
"They"- the coporations- want us to smoke because it makes a huge profit, and the sexual focus of our society comes from advertising because the industry is pushing the button that works on just about everyone- sex. After all, sex sells, doesn't it? If you were to look at how people actually behave, you would find that godless liberals are actually more moral- they lie, cheat, steal, and fornicate less often and generally profess (and act on) selfless values more often than the supposedly religious. So, in sum, I think you've got the wrong "they" in your crosshairs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kind of trollish here, but...
Isn't the unprotected sex thing much more of a Republican thing, because (according to certain of them) BIRTH CONTROL IS BAD?
After all, we Godless Sodomite Family-Hating Tree-Hugging Liberals are pro-condoms, pro-sex-ed, pro-abstinance-plus, and pro-social-programs-that-support-unwed-mothers. Also, we think that people who provide birth control prescriptions, counseling or referrals for abortion/adoption services, and educational materials about such things should be able to (gasp!) talk about those issues without losing funding.
(We are not, by the way, pro-trading horrible diseases. That's an icky fallacy and not much fun at a party. :b)
Sorry guys. I'm not playing with much sense of humor tonight. It's nothing personal (or even political)-- I had dental work done today.
Evil Republican Dental Work. (Ow.)
There is no such thing as a weed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Wow, you guys are big on rewriting history.
And you wanted a draft. And you wanted the courts to step in and change the election results, and you don't want free speech, and you are against heterosexual marriage, and you want to raise everbody's taxes, deny health coverage to the rich, kill puppies in the name of cats, eat snails, ban beer in football stadiums, deny ketchup to millions of school kids, hug trees, deny hugs to SUV's, turn off Fox News, turn on Bill Clinton, turn in George Bush, turn over American soveriegnty, turn up the number of abortions, and turn down the chance to spread liberty to the Muslim world.
I've heard some Democrats say y'all need a new message, truth is y'all need new values. There's millions of Red state Democrats, like myself (being a Republican don't mean I aint a Democrat), who'd fight hard for a Democratic candidate that shared our values. Aint seen one since...maybe Truman, since I aint claiming Carter. He had all the right values, but knew peanuts about runnin a country. Now Reagan, there was a President the Red Democrats could love.
Me, I just live and let live, fight for what's right, work hard, play rough, and don't settle for second best. Thats why I almost always win and never really lose.
So take your pansy blue helemted, French licking, Starbucks coffee drinking, Vermont Teddy Bear ordering, luxery towncar driving, blue blooded, ivy league, liberal close minded elitisist VDS and stick right next to your virtual desktop stripper. I prefer the real thing. May be Bush League, but we gets the job done
Typical neofascist rebuttal - an attack on the person and never the issue.
Notice how this is a responce to Signym quoteing HERO? Instead of quantifiying his own words... he attacks Signym with "state of the art" right wing name calling.
Reading this it breaks down into: "you, you people, me, we who are rightious, and take your...
*sigh* ... good gracious, I'm morderating.
Having said that it's well written. Nice flow. Oh, and HERO, you can eat me.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME