Voter fraud - American election vastly corrupted
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Monday, January 27, 2025 00:47
VIEWED: 29159
PAGE 14 of 16
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman: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.
Unfortunately Ghoulman you are the consummate Hypocrite. You accuse everyone of attacking other folks, when every single one of your posts does the exact same thing, and in many cases crosses a line between civillity and discordance. You label and insult those who don't agree with your "Opinion". "Neo-Fascist" being a good example of such an attack. Your rebuttals could be considered "State of the Art Left Wing name calling"
Everyone gets their gander up occasionally. I'm a guilty member of that as well.
It is difficult to remain civil when you are constantly attacked for being an American and lumped in with anyone who has fringe beliefs in either direction.
As for moderator.. this board desperately needs one, to keep the topics civil, as well as the titles of the topics. I could compile a list of the Anti-American Hatemongering you have initiated on this board, changing the landscape from civil discourse to defensive antagonizing discourse.
I have a few friends who won't even visit this Firefly site, because when they first did the first thing they saw was an Anti-American statement in the forum topics on the main page.
It's tough to get folks to share their love of the BDS, when they feel they will be attacked if they join the ranks.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Typical neofascist rebuttal - an attack on the person and never the issue.
Aint nothing "neo" or "fascist" about it. I'm Conservative. Same Conservative who sailed to a new world looking for new ideas. Same conservative who blazed trails, fought indians, and tamed a continent. Same Conservative who dumped tea in the harbor, said no to King George, and yes to the soveriegnty of my friends and neighbors. Same Conservative who stood the walls under the rocket's red glare, charged the field at Fredricksburg, stormed the beaches of Normandy. Same Conservative who freed America from Kings, freed slaves from bondage, freed Europe from Nazis, gave hope to millions, gave the boot to Saddam, and our vote to George Bush.
Quote:
he attacks Signym with "state of the art" right wing name calling.
It aint "state of the art". I tell it like it is, no bullshit, thats as old as time. Liberals hate it because it aint to their liking. They invent "political correctness" to civilize the truth out of us Red staters and reserve speech to themselves or at least their approved topics, language, and viewpoints.
Quote:
Reading this it breaks down into: "you, you people, me, we who are rightious, and take your...
Its always been "you people" and "we, us". Thats the American way. Two sides, or more, discussing, arguning, and ultimately voting. The problem is you prefer the other way. When only your side gets to talk, gets to have power, gets to have an opinion. Thats why you and France, and Saddam, and Koffi "I don't know nothin bout no oil money" UN Guy and John Kerry can't stand it. Not only are you losing, you can't stand that anyone dares question you.
Quote:
Oh, and HERO, you can eat me.
Sorry, I don't approve of that particular life choice. I leave you free to practice it in the privacy of your own world, but don't include me in your fantasies. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I just choose not to particiapte. Sure, I'm a sexy man. But thats not an invitation to hold hands and take long showers.
Unless your a hot, liberal chick...then send me your number and I'll show you my concealed weapon...
For the record, I'm a moderate on the whole gay issue. I support civil unions (makes sense to the lawyer in me), but not gay marriage (thats the Christian conservative side). I also am against sex between men (thats the homophobic side) but am in favor of sex between hot women (thats the heterosexual side). So I think that makes me a moderate leaning hippocrite...but its my opinion, MINE, ALL MINE, GO AWAY, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT!
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Um Hero, I follow your drift starting at "Aint nothing "neo" or "fascist" about it. I'm Conservative. Same Conservative who sailed to a new world looking for new ideas. Same conservative who blazed trails, fought indians, and tamed a continent. Same Conservative who dumped tea in the harbor, said no to King George, and yes to the soveriegnty of my friends and neighbors. Same Conservative who stood the walls under the rocket's red glare, charged the field at Fredricksburg, stormed the beaches of Normandy. Same Conservative who freed America from Kings, freed slaves from bondage, freed Europe from Nazis, gave hope to millions, gave the boot to Saddam, and our vote to George Bush."
But you lost me at a couple of points... Calling yourself "conservative" kinds of obscures the fact that in Colonial times you would have been called a traitor by the then-existing government (which couldn't tolerate dissent), fighting (and enslaving) Indians just isn't consistent with freeing slaves, and "giving hope to millions" doesn't square with supporting dicatorship abroad.
So I believe in the same ideals you do but I'm more consistent about it, and I might possibly have a more balanced view of my role in history- Other than those two caveats I think we're on the same page.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary%5C14736.html
A verifiable-voting insurgency
Colleen Redman
Redman, of Floyd, is a writer and poet.
Just as the U.S. invasion of Iraq seemed over with the fall of Baghdad, so did the 2004 presidential election seem to end when John Kerry conceded. But the war was hardly over when Bush prematurely claimed victory, and the election isn't over, either.
In fact, a new Harris Poll indicates that one in five Americans doesn't believe the election was legitimate. The number of skeptics would probably be higher if more people were aware of the scope of voting irregularities that occurred. Unfortunately, the corporate-owned media have mostly fallen in line with the "powers that be," just as they did in the run-up to the war (something a few major newspapers later apologized for).
In the days following the election, I got my election news from the Internet because the mainstream media weren't covering it thoroughly. Bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering an odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in paper-ballot states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic voting states, wrote Thom Hartmann, author and nationally syndicated talk show host, in a Nov. 4 article that really piqued my interest.
With a story here ("Vote count glitches haunt Bush's supposed mandate") and a story there ("Palm Beach County logs 88,000 more votes than voters"), I pieced together news from across the country in an effort to inform myself.
On Nov. 14, I came across a compelling paper by University of Pennsylvania Professor Steven Freeman, titled "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy." After comparing exit polls, which had Kerry in the lead, with the announced results for Bush in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania, Freedman, a statistician, calculated that the odds against such an accidental discrepancy in all three states together are 250 million to 1.
Exit polls generally match official voting counts and have been used around the world as a way to verify voter accuracy and guard against vote tampering. Even Dick Morris, a Republican consultant and Fox News regular, said in an article for The Hill, "Exit polls are almost never wrong. ... [They] cannot be wrong across the board as they were on election night. I suspect foul play."
In an ironic twist, the media have recently been in high gear covering the suspected vote fraud in Ukraine. Just weeks after our own election, in which exit polls didn't match the computerized tallies, The Associated Press, while reporting the story, included Ukraine's exit poll discrepancies as evidence of alleged vote fraud there.
Not only have the media been neglectful of investigating the validity of the U.S. election, they have occasionally discredited those who have questioned it, referring to them as "conspiracy theorists." Given the high numbers of vote "purges," "spoiled" ballots, voter intimidation incidents and other reported irregularities that disenfranchised mostly Democratic voters, coupled with the knowledge that the largest voting machine companies are owned by known Republicans, or that a John Hopkins study determined that electronic voting machines are wide open for fraud, isn't some oversight in order? Isn't it suspicious that voting anomalies have overwhelmingly come down in favor of Bush?
While tens of thousands of Ukrainians are in the streets defending the principles of democracy, most Americans probably aren't even aware of the University of California-Berkeley statistical study that found that irregularities with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 to 260,000 or more excess votes to Bush in Florida. For the sake of all future elections involving electronic voting, someone must explain the statistical anomalies in Florida, the professor who headed up the study said.
If Americans knew that a reputable MIT political scientist succeeded in replicating the Berkeley analysis, would they take to the streets like the Ukrainians, or at least get on the phone to their congressmen?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hardware:
While tens of thousands of Ukrainians are in the streets defending the principles of democracy, most Americans probably aren't even aware of the University of California-Berkeley statistical study that found that irregularities with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 to 260,000 or more excess votes to Bush in Florida. For the sake of all future elections involving electronic voting, someone must explain the statistical anomalies in Florida, the professor who headed up the study said.
I just posed this link in another threat, but I figured I should post it here too since it specifically addresses this point.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/01/opinion/main658540.shtml
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I read the article in the other thread, but I thought I'd respond here.
The first 'voting anomaly' instance in Florida is not taken seriously by anyone, so far as I know.
There is another statistical analysis aside from Berkley's, which examines exit polls (not approval ratings) v counts, which is not specifically adressed in the article.
The story behind the 'extra tapes' through Black Box Voting is MUCH more interesting than indicated here. Part of that story is that the 'tally tapes' they were supposed to see (and which were presented as original poll tapes) did NOT match the original signed and dated poll tapes found in the trash.
Whatever became of those 60,000 mail-in ballots that disappeared in Florida? They were going to re-send about 20,000, but not only did that not cover the full amount that went AWOL, it was thought that they could not be filled in and returned on time to count.
The 90,000 mostly Democrats who were dropped off the voter registration list for 2000 were never returned to it.
There were voting machines witheld in Democratic precincts in Ohio.
Etc etc etc.
Even the 'reasoned' article concludes that these irregularities have to be looked into. But that's a switch from the automatic dismissiveness in the first few weeks.
I don't think anyone wants anything more than that ALL the problems be looked into thoroughly and carefully. The question is: will it happen?
I dunno. What's your prognostication? The forces of the status quo are doing their best to bury the questions. Will they whitewash the answers as well? Or will the push to examine the facts prevail?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So um...
How does a gay marriage do ANYTHING to heterosexual marriage?
And how does being liberal mean we're against heterosexual marriage? Maybe you're joking to say it, but this is a charge that's been made seriously over and over again, and frankly those of us on the open, accepting side of this issue are really confused by y'all on the other side of it. We're not forcing conservative churches to do anything they don't want to do; we just want to make certain that legally speaking, as well as spiritually speaking in the case of, say, Unitarian churches, all people are protected equally under the law.
After all, I'm a happily married heterosexual who takes great pains to make sure my marriage is strong and communicative and all that, and as we've been together for a scant 5 years, I expect we'll have a very long time of being happily married to each other for galloping aeons to come. So how does my stance on gay marriage hurt heterosexual marriage at all?
Sign me really confused...
There is no such thing as a weed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Unicorn- How're the teeth??
I think HERO is still stuck on the "fighting Indians and freeing the slaves" conundrum. If he's not, he should be! That's one of the things I find so very interesting about right-wingers: the deep deep chasms in their minds between one thought and another. I don't think I could live with that level of internal self-contradiction. It would drive me craz ... oh wait, nevermind!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JenDandy:
If you're in Canada why do you care so much about what's going on in the U.S.?
I'm not in Canada I'm from the UK and I'll damn well tell you why we care.
You are the biggest, most powerful nation in the world, but right now, in the world's playground, you are a hateful, immature, nasty little boy running around pushing everyone over.
I have nothing against AMERICANS. You are people, exactly the same as us. However, right now, I hate AMERICA and everything it stands for. As does just about everyone in the world. Europeans don't even like you anymore, nor Canadians. You may be powerful but you're carving out a future where you have no friends you can rely on.
Unfortunately, it's not as simple as us saying "it's somewhere else, we shouldn't get involved, it's not my country."
Bollocks. It's not my country, but it is my f*cking planet - it belongs to all of us. The other reason we care is because a retarded maniac like Bush has the kind of reach which could end MY life, and he has no right to do that. He could end not just my life, but yours, my five year old daughter's life, the lives of everyone I know - the lives of almost everyone on the planet.
So yeah, we f*cking care.
Your constitution has been pissed on, and whether you voted for him or not everyone in that once-great country of yours has been made a monkey of. And people who go "Snigger, let's point and laugh at the conspiracy theorist!" are letting it happen.
In what kind of world wouldn't the people with all the power and money in the world sink to unethical means to keep hold of that?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Littlemanlovesfire:
In what kind of world wouldn't the people with all the power and money in the world sink to unethical means to keep hold of that?
well.. I think everyone needs to take a look at their own governments. The US isn't teh only one being shifty behind the closed doors. France, Germany, Russia..the majority of the UN etc..etc.. are using unethical means to retain power and improve upon it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME