Voter fraud - American election vastly corrupted II

POSTED BY: rue
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 7, 2006 16:47
VIEWED: 4204
PAGE 3 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

SIGNYM

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:20 PM

Quote:
So, if there is such a well researched, almost irrefutable, fact-based and well written report drafted by a man who is both a Kennedy and a lawmaker himself, then why isn't this report being acted on? If this was as solid of a case as it appeared then this would easily be enough to begin a congressional hearing, if nothing else. He has plenty of connections to make something happen with this.

Do you know how Congress works? The majority party gets to chair of all of the Committees. Since both Senate and House are Republican, exactly which Committee did you have in mind for that Hearing? The Senate Judiciary Committee? (Specter, PA, R) The Select Committee on Ethics? (Voinovich, Ohio, R) The House Committee on Government Reform? (Davis, VA, R)

Not only that, but the Majority Leader (both Repubclians) can decide whether or not to provide a room for said hearing, and whether or not to call a Hearing.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

RUE

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:40 PM

The most extensive investigation of what happened in Ohio was conducted by Rep. John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. ... Conyers and the committee's minority staff held public hearings in Ohio, where they looked into more than 50,000 complaints from voters.

So, as you see, this was not an investigation by the full committee acting with authority. This isn't an isolated situation. It's the same with other issues. The Democrats hold informal 'hearings' in some small room they've been allowed to use. These hearings have no authority and don't get news coverage, and so even the questions aren't aired. As to formal investigations with meaningful outcomes, they are the perogative of the majority party. And republicans would be investigating their own party.

Quote:
Originally posted by Amiton:
Quote:
Posted by Rue:
The claim seems outrageous: there was a conspiracy by a few well-placed people to throw the election.

That's why there is so much analysis, so much testimony, so much hard data and so many references.

It's easy to brush off the claim as just another tin foil hat loony bin story. It's not easy to brush off so many specifics. The power of the article lies in the data. You start out skeptical. But as you read on, and on, and on, the case for fraud builds into a solid, respectable, believable one.

This is actually what gives me more pause than anything else in the entire process. No matter how well these pieces of data check out, we can't be getting the whole story.

The Kennedys are not a polital force to be laughed off. The family at large contains some of the most powerful lawmakers in US history. I've heard many jokes referring to the opinion that the closest thing that this country has to royalty is the Kennedys.

So, if there is such a well researched, almost irrefutable, fact-based and well written report drafted by a man who is both a Kennedy and a lawmaker himself, then why isn't this report being acted on? If this was as solid of a case as it appeared then this would easily be enough to begin a congressional hearing, if nothing else. He has plenty of connections to make something happen with this.

Instead, it shows up as essentially an op-ed piece in a magazine with a subscriber base that is deeply disillusioned with the Bush Administration, the Republican Party, American politics in general. It doesn't make sense as anything more than a tool to sway public opinion as far as I can tell.

I will definitely agree that the information in the article is pretty damning and indicates more than a remote possibilty. What's being done to prevent it by the politicians? It doesn't sound like much besides bellyaching from either side.

There were numerous reports dealing with voter tampering that indicted both parties in 2004. Some of the things that were being reported were absolutely sick. At the same time, having that ability serves the needs of both parties, and you can't affect the abilities of one group effectively without doing it to the other. I don't think the Democrats really *want* the changes to be made, or at the very least not the same way that the majority of American citizens do.

Not to mention, there's a lot of sass being thrown around in a lot of the political threads that the only thing the Republicans as a group do well is widen the class differential and transfer more and more power and wealth to those that already have it. That would include those Democratic national level politicians, too. The party can preach the planks in their platform to help the middle and lower class until the cows come home, but to actually implement those benefits is a detriment to the wellbeing of the politician and his family. Noble and in line with his duty? Yes, but it's a pretty bitter pill to swallow when you have the power to prevent your own suffering, and even moreso when you can do it without anyone finding out.

Amiton.

(edited for clarity)

Nearly everything I know I learned

AMITON

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Do you know how Congress works? The majority party gets to chair of all of the Committees. Since both Senate and House are Republican, exactly which Committee did you have in mind for that Hearing? The Senate Judiciary Committee? (Specter, PA, R) The Select Committee on Ethics? (Voinovich, Ohio, R) The House Committee on Government Reform? (Davis, VA, R)

Not only that, but the Majority Leader (both Repubclians) can decide whether or not to provide a room for said hearing, and whether or not to call a Hearing.

Yes, I understand Congress. I will say that if you feel that the process is that clearly simple and that a Kennedy, *any* Kennedy is powerless to make enough noise about this to get something done about it, then we really don't have much to talk about. I think the divergence between our viewpoints may be too much to overcome in a simple debate.

The main point I was making in my post (man, I'm having to clarify the things I say a lot lately. I think I need to revisit the practice of focusing my writing better) was to ask why is something of this caliber being written for Rolling Stone? Why is this able to be contained so well if all of this information is freely available and already organized? Given the politcally charged nature of American consciousness right now and the deplorable approval rating of Bush, there should be adequate impetus to have something made out of this...given it is the whole story. I can't believe that it's that simple, though, and I suspect that is the reason why this isn't a bigger piece of news.

Amiton.

RUE

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:48 PM

Robert F Kenneday, Jr is not in government or politics and never has been. He is an environmental lawyer and college professor.

After the rapture, can I have your car?

RUE

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:51 PM

Just reposting here to, I hope, help clarity.

The most extensive investigation of what happened in Ohio was conducted by Rep. John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. ... Conyers and the committee's minority staff held public hearings in Ohio, where they looked into more than 50,000 complaints from voters.

So, as you see, this was not an investigation by the full committee acting with authority. This isn't an isolated situation. It's the same with other issues. The Democrats hold informal 'hearings' in some small room they've been allowed to use. These hearings have no authority and don't get news coverage, and so even the questions aren't aired. As to formal investigations with meaningful outcomes, they are the perogative of the majority party. And republicans would be investigating their own party.

Quote:
why is something of this caliber being written for Rolling Stone? Why is this able to be contained so well if all of this information is freely available and already organized?
Amiton.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 7:58 PM

Quote:
Yes, I understand Congress. I will say that if you feel that the process is that clearly simple and that a Kennedy, *any* Kennedy is powerless to make enough noise about this to get something done about it, then we really don't have much to talk about. I think the divergence between our viewpoints may be too much to overcome in a simple debate.

The main point I was making in my post (man, I'm having to clarify the things I say a lot lately. I think I need to revisit the practice of focusing my writing better) was to ask why is something of this caliber being written for Rolling Stone? Why is this able to be contained so well if all of this information is freely available and already organized? Given the politcally charged nature of American consciousness right now and the deplorable approval rating of Bush, there should be adequate impetus to have something made out of this...given it is the whole story. I can't believe that it's that simple, though, and I suspect that is the reason why this isn't a bigger piece of news.

Several reasons. One of them is in the article itself: The Democrats are afraid the the (majority) Republicans will take any reform they propose and make the whole voting process even MORE difficult than it already is. Another reason- The major media outlets have been having a field day consolidating under Bush II thanks to deregulation. While reporters and editors know what's going on, they also don't want to bite the hand that feeds them (the managment, who is in turn beholden to the Republican Party).

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

HKCAVALIER

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 8:09 PM

Hey Signy! Thanks for posting so I don't have to! Don't it make ya crazy to think that folks don't understand how this country is being taken over? All this information is available to anyone who looks. But if you don't look, you only get what people hand you.

It's really amazing how vulnerable the Constitution of the United States is to the one party model. The framers obviously never considered the possibility that one party could control all three branches of government at once. What a dangerous, dangerous oversight. It's almost surprising that this "perminent majority" nastiness didn't happen sooner. Is this gonna break us, do you think?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 8:30 PM

People who pride themselves on "knowing what's going on" should survey who is publishing fraud reports and who is not. Once a person has generated that list the cause should be pellucidly clear.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

AMITON

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 8:41 PM

Quote:
Robert F Kenneday, Jr is not in government or politics and never has been. He is an environmental lawyer and college professor.

That must be my mistake =p Apparently *I* have the wrong Kennedy instead of Hero

I hope you guys know that I'm not saying that this is legit. All I'm trying to do is be a reasonable voice of descention. I do firmly believe that there's a lot more to this story than any of us will ever find out, and I'm even more secure in my belief that the whole lot of national level politicians are sumbiches who are mucking up the process.

Quote:
It's really amazing how vulnerable the Constitution of the United States is to the one party model. The framers obviously never considered the possibility that one party could control all three branches of government at once. What a dangerous, dangerous oversight. It's almost surprising that this "perminent majority" nastiness didn't happen sooner. Is this gonna break us, do you think?

HKCavalier

No, I don't think this will break us. I think this muckity-muck goodness has been going on since well before the founding fathers finished leaving their marks. I lay my (admittedly frail) hopes in the concept that, much like capitalism, as long as there is equivilent competitiveness by the parties involved, they will beat each other back into line before irreversable damage is done. The real danger is when they play too well together and don't tell us about it.

Amiton.

SIMONWHO

Tuesday, June 6, 2006 8:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
in Rehab they don't have much else to do...

Did you hear that from your President's personal experience?

I'm actually mildly curious Hero: do you favour electoral reforms or are you happy with the current system?

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE