Yeah, that'll work.

get over what?

Stolen elections via Premier/Diebold is normal these days:>)

Scalia, is a PIMP for the Republician party, this fuck is a disgrace to the Supreme Court. Scalia an his Moral Police an the Conservative Right is the reason our Country, that has 5% of the population of the World has 25% of all the prisoners in the World.

USA, USA, USA, Were Number 1, were number 1 what a FUCKING DISGRACE!!!!!!! This war on Drug policy is a joke!!!!

Kennedy stole the 1960 election and we got over it.

Will somebody please knock the Celisary? It seems to be stuck on caps and exclamation marks...

It's obvious that Celisary is a liberal Democrat, that's for sure. I think one of many reasons why the Dems hate morality is it clearly defines right from wrong. And, so many times, they find themselves on the wrong side of it.

Caps and exclamation marks, maybe, but contentwise, right on. Righties get pissed if we bring in Hitler, but "get over it" won't work either if Hitler addresses Jews about the holocaust. Picking Bush over Gore was a political hatchet job, an assassination this land - no this world! will not get over. Ever. herm

Scalia, is a PIMP for the Republician party, this fuck is a disgrace to the Supreme Court. Scalia an his Moral Police an the Conservative Right is the reason our Country, that has 5% of the population of the World has 25% of all the prisoners in the World.

USA, USA, USA, Were Number 1, were number 1 what a FUCKING DISGRACE!!!!!!! This war on Drug policy is a joke!!!!

Posted by celisary


Your post barely has anything to do with the subject or the discussion. Go sleep it off, whatever it is.

And remember what the article says: ultimately the SCOTUS voted 7 to 2 on this, genius. Throw your ludicrous bullshit out the window, along with that faulty exclamation mark key.

Stolen elections via Premier/Diebold is normal these days:>)

Posted by Bani

Never happened in Chicago when they used paper. Pull your head out and realize that election frad is older than elections. It wasn't invented by the republicans in 2000.

Caps and exclamation marks, maybe, but contentwise, right on. Righties get pissed if we bring in Hitler, but "get over it" won't work either if Hitler addresses Jews about the holocaust. Picking Bush over Gore was a political hatchet job, an assassination this land - no this world! will not get over. Ever. herm
Posted by herm


Hitler? Holocaust? WTF? Have you been drinking Celisary's bong water?

Hey dad if you don't like that 7 to 2 SCOTUS "hatchet job" you must be an absolute peach when it comes to settling bowling scores.

"It's obvious that Celisary is a liberal Democrat, that's for sure. I think one of many reasons why the Dems hate morality is it clearly defines right from wrong. And, so many times, they find themselves on the wrong side of it."

Well, they certainly have plenty of Republicans to keep them company.


"Caps and exclamation marks, maybe, but contentwise, right on. Righties get pissed if we bring in Hitler, but "get over it" won't work either if Hitler addresses Jews about the holocaust. Picking Bush over Gore was a political hatchet job, an assassination this land - no this world! will not get over. Ever."

I'm always amazed at how high some members continue to raise the level of discourse on the Retort.

Mossadegh at least you are fair.

"Dems hate morality (because) it clearly defines right from wrong."

Wow! Which morality are we talking about, inflicting an unelected president on a nation, torturing prisoners, putting fetal rights ahead of people's rights? I mean, we're testing the whole GOP here. herm

"Dems hate morality (because) it clearly defines right from wrong."

Wow! Which morality are we talking about, inflicting an unelected president on a nation, torturing prisoners, putting fetal rights ahead of people's rights? I mean, we're testing the whole GOP here. herm

yep - too much bong water.

Herm, having won the electoral college vote, how is it that Bush is unelected? As the subject title suggests, get over it already.

After the 2000 election, Florida Democrats were actively trying to change the definition of what constitutes a vote. The Supreme Court rightfully stopped the Dems from trying to change the rules after the election was over.

REP - I know it's a cliche but that's like moving the goalposts after the winning touchdown is disputed!

Bush won in 2000 on every count even the ones done by the media after the decision was finalized.

It would not have even been that close had the news media in conjunction with the Voter News Service not tried to sabotage the election by calling Florida before the polls had even closed in the heavily republican Florida pan handle. This was an obvious attempt to influence the outcome of both Florida and other close states across the country.

Bee Swell

Crack - what do you think of Bill O'Reilly's assertion that given the closeness of the race, Gore could have won if he had only agreed to appear on O'Reilly just before the election? All the extra pub and buzz you know?

I see a pattern here. It must be mandatory to blame Republicans by the second post on this site.

Voter fraud is mostly Democrats by a high percentage. The trouble is they need more fraud to win the general election. They love to lay blame on voting machines and claim Republicans stole the election. It is comical.

Keep repeating it till it becomes true.

Keep repeating it till it becomes true.

Posted by KBM at 2008-04-24 10:51 PM


Seems like it worked for you.

MrFair

Why are you talking to that troll? Do you anticipate an intelligent response or some sort of debate? Is this your first day?

KBM, your great man. Can I shake your hand one day?

These democrats think they are in the Wizard of Oz or something.

hey B-Bob did you click your heels 3x and say "Gore won Florida! GORE WON FLORIDA GORE WON FLORIDA!"

Then you woke up and realized republicans owned you free and you lost.

Again.

lol

Kuma

I don't want the lefties to get over it. The UnabletoMoveOn.org crowd has been so entertaining for so long, they've become a permanent feature in the political landscape.

Funny thing is, what cost Al Gore the state of Florida was Democratic voters guides that were mis-printed. They can't even get the damn sample ballots right. What a bunch of retards.

RIR

I would say that belonging to the 28% who think Bush is doing a heckuva a job is a pretty good definition of a retard.

;-)

"KBM, your great man. Can I shake your hand one day? These democrats think they are in the Wizard of Oz or something."

These uglies are as illiterate as they are vicious, The lower case democrats will get a huge charge out of seeing these boors turned out. Between Diebold and The Court, voter fraud and lost ballots, it will take carrying 40 states to get the corporate yahoos out of office. But I think we'll do it. herm

I would say that belonging to the 28% who think Bush is doing a heckuva a job is a pretty good definition of a retard.

I wonder what percentage of those "retards" see smokestacks on the moon?

Goatman-
That depends. Did Bush build them for freedom and democracy?

Get over it? The term is MoveOn. That event was the genesis of the organization.

"That event was the genesis of the organization."

Incorrect. Bill Clinton's impeachment trial was.

As much as I think Gore won FL and Bush is a fucktard. Gore screwed up on the recount. He didn't need to go to the supreme court and he should have asked for a state wide recount (or possible revote) and not the counties where he thought he should have done better. He would have been allowed by the election rules.

Scalia is a shit but he is an intelligent shit who is consistent. While I dislike his views in many ways he does represent a segment of US society and should therefore be on the supreme court. My biggest problem is there is now Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito which are too many social conservative votes for the court although I have my suspicions Roberts will move to the center in a few years. Alito is a fucking joke and is always licking Roberts' ball sack. Although he has a cute horny looking daughter.

"Get over it. It's so old by now."


Roe V Wade is even older. Get over that, you fat evil fuck.

Furio- Scalia is hardly consistant. You need a degree in cathlocism to figure out what his next opinion on states rights is going to be. "strict constitutionalist" my ass...

Then again, he is pretty consistant about telling the public how he would rule, then pretending to be objective and refusing to recuse himself. He also consistantly makes an ass of himself in the media, coming across as a thug and a bully.

Hey dad if you don't like that 7 to 2 SCOTUS "hatchet job" you must be an absolute peach when it comes to settling bowling scores.

Posted by MrFair at 2008-04-24 08:47 PM | Reply | Flag


Amazing that you fell for scalias obvious trap. Ask yourself what part was 7-2 and which one was 5-4?

Do a little research...

"Then again, he is pretty consistant about telling the public how he would rule, then pretending to be objective and refusing to recuse himself. He also consistantly makes an ass of himself in the media, coming across as a thug and a bully."

That's my point. It's also a perfect reflection of the your typical religious conservative American.

SOTUS aided and abetted a nondemocratic coup of the United States of America. Real patriots will never "get over it". Get used to it.

Stolen elections via Premier/Diebold is normal these days

I suppose you have proof that this DID happen. Not just some whacked documentary that says it was merely possible to do in an ideal (not real life) condition.

The people that say Bush stole the election consistently ignore the fact that it was Gore that brought the case to the Supreme Court asking for a ruling... not Bush. It was Gore that tried to change the rules after the game. Furio was correct on one thing: If Gore had just asked for a statewide recount, it would have been granted. I don't agree that he would have necessarily taken Florida though.

"strict constitutionalist" my ass...

Those types of libs that dispute the "strict constitutionalist" label are usually the ones that believe the Constitution should be reinterpreted at whim. Their ideas of what the Constitution says is usually at odds with what the founding fathers had in mind. No surprise that they wouldn't recognize a strict constitutionalist when they see one.

I see all the Grand Oil Party trolls are out in full force.

WHAT NOT ENOUGH KIDS TO MOLEST OR GAY SEX IN AIRPORT BATHROOMS TO KEEP YOU ALL BUSY??????

Herm,

Why would conservatives get upset when you bring up "fascist" or "nazi"? They were socialists. They were not conservatives, either, as they overturned the political structures they got into completely. Guess that would make them "liberals".

You socialistas keep arguing about the election you failed to rig sufficiently 8 years ago. In the mean time, some old dotard is gonna kick your ass this year easily. You're getting behind...what about the 2004 election Bush must have stolen and the 2008 election McCain would have stolen....You'd better pick up the pace!

FF Moomanfl

Socialists and fascist, to bad you don't seemed to understand the meanings.

Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

Socialism
Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.

Can someone please explain to me exactly how the SCOTUS stole the election for Bush. I'm not looking for a rant, I'm looking for facts.

"by a vote of 5-4, the Court held that no alternative method could be established within the time limits established by Florida Legislature.[1] The per curiam opinion was argued on the basis of Equal Protection."


look it up kids, the vote that mattered was 5-4, our conservative friend is cherry picking information.

"by a vote of 5-4, the Court held that no alternative method could be established within the time limits established by Florida Legislature.[1] The per curiam opinion was argued on the basis of Equal Protection."


look it up kids, the vote that mattered was 5-4, our conservative friend is cherry picking information.

jwl72-

Well, George Bush didn't win Florida. Gore ended up with 266 electorate votes. Gore won Florida, the scotus stopped the counting. Thus this stole the election. It's actually really simple.

also, remember the popular vote? yeah. no one cares about that because it's not how the system works? where's the democracy....no i forgot, there is no democracy here, this is a republic. and a failing one.

Why did you post the 3rd definition, but not the first 2?

because that is how cherry picking of information works, you don't need to ask, seriously...just post the other two

Why did you post the 3rd definition, but not the first 2?

Because the 3rd actually refers to the correct meaning and origin of the gesture. The first two don't.

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH! YEAH..WHAT'S YOUR SOURCE?!?!

Already linked to it. Or can't you read? Of course if you were Italian like Scalia you wouldn't have needed that source since you would have been raised with the cultural knowledge.

The problem is, Scalia would have known what his gesture really meant. As a non-Italian, you would have misinterpreted his meaning either ignorantly, or intentionally.

"Because the 3rd actually refers to the correct meaning and origin of the gesture. The first two don't."

Because you said so?

Wiki also says:

Flipping the fingers out from under the chin

A traditional Sicilian gesture analogous in meaning to the raised middle finger.

***"Well, George Bush didn't win Florida. Gore ended up with 266 electorate votes. Gore won Florida, the scotus stopped the counting. Thus this stole the election. It's actually really simple."***

You really didn't read my post did you. I asked for facts. How exactly did the SCOTUS steal the election for Bush? What laws were broken in order for the SCOTUS to give the election to Bush?

And you're correct, this is a representative republic that uses an electoral college. Love it or hate it, that's the way it is.

or you just found a less offensive link...and it just happens to be the 3RD LISTED definition, and the ONLY source you have for that information.

but we're mixing straws here, he's a rude old bastard, which i think we can all agree on.

OR CAN'T YOU READ, RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

"Of course if you were Italian like Scalia you wouldn't have needed that source since you would have been raised with the cultural knowledge."

According to 2 of my co-workers, Mr. D'Ambola and Mr. Campana, the gesture does indeed mean the big F U.

Because you said so?

No, because Italians from the "Old Country" said so.

One of my best friends growing up was full blooded Italian. He used the gesture on me one time joking around the same way you might jokingly flip a friend the bird when they crack on you. His grandmother (who barely spoke english) nearly took his head off. She explained to him, in front of me, what it meant.

Doesn't matter to me really if you believe it or not. People tend to bastardize things from other cultures. Not the first time, certainly won't be the last. I just find it amusing in a pathetic sort of way when you attempt to enlighten someone with the real meaning and they scoff at it as if they were the ones that invented it.

"This was an obvious attempt to influence the outcome of both Florida and other close states across the country."

Riiight. And the Bush cousin who works for Fox News and who happened to be the one who later called it for Bush was just doing his job. My ass!
It was a well planned, well orchestrated theft of an election but Republican were fine with that because they won. Changed the fabric of America forever, we now don't necessarily believe we even live in a democracy. Millions of Democrats fear that even when Barrack gets the most votes McCain will still be the winner. My only thought about it is if Obama is the nominee and if he obviously wins the election just try to steal it....this time it will be a little less peaceful. There will be vicious riots if you Republicans try to do what you did do in 2000. The scum bag Republicans who stormed the Dade Co. Elections supervisors office can come back out and try again but this time they will go to hospitals instead of back home when they are done. That isn't me threatening, it is just repeating what I have heard some black friends say and they ain't kidding. I don't think many of us even understand how important this thing is to most of the black community. In fact Hillary Clinton, if nominated, will be unelectable bacause of it. If we want a Democratic President it will be Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton cannot get the black vote and without it she can't win.

"I just find it amusing in a pathetic sort of way when you attempt to enlighten someone with the real meaning and they scoff at it as if they were the ones that invented it."

So, you're not Italian either huh? Got it.

if you could just provide even one other source for that, i would accept what you have said.

just saying dude, that until then, you look like a douchebag.

I can't believe the libs are still crying over this. They'll never hesitate to chastise someone who brings up "Clinton's blow job" because it is in the past, but they'll be crying about these two elections forever, it seems. Shit, you never hear mention of the Kennedys stealing the '60 election.

I'm no Scalia fan, but I have to agree with him:

GET OVER IT!

When that idiot Scalia brings it up, and then says 'get over it,' WHY SHOULDN'T WE GET TO RESPOND TO HIM- HE BROUGHT IT UP YOU FUCKING MORON

Maybe it's just me, but I have difficulty equating the passions ignited in people who see the Bush v. Gore decision as putting the seal of approval on a stolen election with the outrage ignited by Clinton getting sucked off in the Oval Office.

and why is it that anytime anything gets brought up,

'RABBLE RABBLE CLINTON BLOWJOB RABBLE'

you guys get over that, and we promise to be a little less bitter over bush v gore

Moneywar,


Are you implying that Hitler and his socialist Nazis were NOT fascists? I can't tell from the definitions.

What about Mussolini and his socialists, who invented the term "fascist" ?

I can't tell whether you're implying they are two peas in a pod, or not...

Clearly, they were both of these things. In that what they were doing was new and they swept out the old order, they were also liberals.

It boils down to this, Florida and by extension Floridians are far too fucking stupid to be involved in this process.

As proof, I give you Corky Seaton Beggs Zell Lieberman that proud Hillary Shill.

Kennedy stole the 1960 election and we got over it.

Posted by fwthom at 2008-04-24 08:29 PM | Reply | Flag:


A: Self retorting retort

B: Fuck you Goatman

That from Reagan (Insert IQ Here).

What'sa matter Corky? Were you one of the Floridiots that couldn't figure out whether you were voting for Bush, Gore, Nader or Robertson? Has that stinging pain left you the bitter trailer dweller that you've become?

i hope obama nominates far left socialist loons to the court.

then we'll get our revenge

I think Democrats have gotten over 2000 as much as is possible when we suspect the same thing is going to happen again in 2008. Personally, I expect the radical right to do many illegal things to try to hang on to power. They have no consciences because they are ideologically driven and believe that they represent God. That is what makes them so dangerous.

Danni, Are you denying that the MSM called the state for Gore before the polls were closed in the western panhandle? You said the Bush cousin called it "later"; does that mean after the polls were closed?

"It was a well planned, well orchestrated theft of an election but Republican were fine with that because they won."

Once again someone give me some facts on how it was stolen. What laws were broken?

"we now don't necessarily believe we even live in a democracy."

We don't, it is a representative republic.

Danni,

As someone who doesn't believe in God, I'm surprised you'd be afraid of him!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"FUCK YOU RIGHT WING ASSHOLES!!!

yup it up you neocon freaks, we're going to bury you assholes in november

Keep talking Sir Mike. I love loons from you. I heard that same thing in 2004 and 2000/ Keep crying wolf puppy dog.

WHY SHOULDN'T WE GET TO RESPOND TO HIM-

And respond and respond and respond and respond and respond and respond . . . .

get over it....

Celisary,

Can't fight the Seether
Can't fight the Seether
Can't fight the Seether
I can't see her till I'm foaming at the Mouth.

Maybe it's just me, but I have difficulty equating the passions ignited in people who see the Bush v. Gore decision as putting the seal of approval on a stolen election

It's only a "stolen election" because your guy lost. If it was the identical situation, identical supreme court decision and it was Gore who got those extre 500+ votes, it would be the Republicans screaming "stolen election" and you libs would be perfectly happy with the decision.

I dare any one of you libs to tell me that if this was the case you would be in the right's corner screaming "stolen election". I dare you.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"FUCK YOU RIGHT WING ASSHOLES!!!

Celisary -- always quick with a meaningful and thought provoking retort.

"If it was the identical situation, identical supreme court decision and it was Gore who got those extre 500+ votes, it would be the Republicans screaming "stolen election" and you libs would be perfectly happy with the decision."

But the decision wasn't about who got "those extra 500+ votes". The decision was to order the State of Florida to stop recounting, overriding a decision by the State Supreme Court. There are very real Constitutional and jurisdictional questions around that decision.

It is what it is, but no matter how much Scalia wants it to go away, it will always be controversial. Especially since it was a 5-4 decision. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

can't stop what's coming....


i love how during the clinton years you freaks just rabbled on for 8 straight years, and still to this day talk about it....but even with a crippled economy, a criminal war, massive job loss, denegration of the constitution (which ironically you morons claim to love so much), and the highest pay out of food stamps in history.....everything wrong you claimed about clinton is ACTUALLY HAPPENING now, and you people are to bastardized and sheepish to even notice it. it's shocking that none of you have any facts about anything, you just say 'too bad, get over it'

and i never....said that in 04 so speak for yourself homeboy.....i worked the campaign, i supported it, but never held the illusion that we were for sure going to win.....

that being said...

you can't stop what's coming....the most liberal Congress and Presidency you facist bastards ever had nightmares about is about to become reality.

don't pass out.

Danforth wrote,

"Incorrect. Bill Clinton's impeachment trial was."

I stand corrected.

yup it up you neocon freaks, we're going to bury you assholes in november...

...and then my dad's gonna beat up your dad. So there! *tongue sticking out*

Sir mike

But the decision wasn't about who got "those extra 500+ votes". The decision was to order the State of Florida to stop recounting, overriding a decision by the State Supreme Court. There are very real Constitutional and jurisdictional questions around that decision.

Nice dodge. We all know the circumstances. Still I dare you to tell me that if it was Gore who won that you would be screaming that he stole the election.

"As someone who doesn't believe in God, I'm surprised you'd be afraid of him!"

I'm not an atheist, I'm an agnostic, and as such I can fear the possiblity that there is a God. And if there is one I don't want him mad at me.

"We don't, it is a representative republic."

OK, technical foul. Two shots.

'RABBLE RABBLE CLINTON BLOWJOB RABBLE'
get over it
Posted by sir_mike at 2008-04-25 09:38 AM


Only if you can get Nulli over Mac's divorce.

Clarifying what the Supreme Court decision was actually about is a dodge? What special little world are you living in?

I think the legal decision was wrong under the Constitution. They re-interpreted a jurisdictional issue in a way never done before.

So again, the decision is what it is. We are all free to disagree or agree with it, but it remains and will always be controversial.

That is what the discussion should revolve around, Goat. Not petty, trivial matters like who would scream under what circumstances.

SOTUS aided and abetted a nondemocratic coup of the United States of America. Real patriots will never "get over it". Get used to it.

Posted by igmoramus
* * * *

This is just what I mean.

Hilarious.

SAR -- IOW, you would NOT be screaming "stolen election" if it was Gore who had the extra 500+ votes at the time of the SC decision.

I didn't think so.

What special little world are you living in?

I needn't ask the same question to you. It is obvious your special little world is one that cries "foul" at SC decisions, Diebold machines, whatever, when "your" guy loses. If he wins under the identical circumstances, the world is peachy and you are strangely silent.

I think that world is called "hypocrisy"

That is what the discussion should revolve around, Goat. Not petty, trivial matters like who would scream under what circumstances.

This is true. But it is much easier to debate a person who can see both sides objectively (BTW, I'm not say that you personally don't, but as a rule any partisian hack -- left or right -- cannot)

OK Goat, you got me. I'm not intelligent enough or politically aware enough to actually read and study about a controversial court decision, form an opinion, and discuss it. I should just be sure I limit my comments about something that important to things like who would scream about what.

Happy now?

The Supreme Court decision was correct. America is not as democracy, and the will of the half million majority that voted for Gore in 2000, really don't count. All rights come from the government. Watch the idiots deny this when the Presidency itself was determined by government--not anything done by "the people". As usual. Votes didn't matter in 2000, the will of the people was not a factor in 2000, States rights were not a factor in 2000, voting laws were not a factor, and in fact---the votes themselves were not a factor. Everyone could just stay home on election day---everyone---and the results would still be exactly the same.

28% of the people--even today---think they "won" in 2000. They are correct if they own an oil company.

;-)

I said it before and I'll say it again...if Algore had just won his home state, he'd probably be president today. All this would be moot. Our little friends just keep picking lousy candidates. They're doing it again now.

OK Goat, you got me. I'm not intelligent enough or politically aware enough to actually read and study about a controversial court decision, form an opinion, and discuss it. I should just be sure I limit my comments about something that important to things like who would scream about what.

Happy now?

No. The snittiness doesn't become you.

I merely put a question out to the DR asking if the shoe was on the other foot if anyone would still feel that the election was stolen -- even if "their" guy won. I am not accusing anyone of being ignorant on the issue. I just want to know if they'd feel the same if Gore won under identical circumstances, that's all.

The Constitution is even OLDER. I guess we better get over that too.

How can anyone trained in law talk this way. This man is incapable of consistent logical thought. He has a political agenda, which includes but also transcends the Republican Party while undermining our founding principals for the benefit of an elite ruling class. That is why they installed him, and Alito, and Thomas, and Roberts. It is equally important to note that many Democrats, including the Clinton's and of course Rockefellar have the same agenda.

We are presented fake choices in fake elections. If that doesn't work then the elections are rigged, preferably locally, but in this case by a highly politicized Court. Labor is nothing, Capital is everything, the fix is in.

Gotta say, after nearly 8 years, I still don't see what is the point the libs are trying to make. Is it that Gore really won Florida? He didn't. Is it that we should have kept recounting, or revoting, until they got the answer they were looking for? Is it that they wish they had gotten their hands on a few more military absentee ballots? How did they think the outcome would be different, were they to have gotten exactly what they said they wanted?

The Florida Supreme Court was breaking Florida law, and violating their own rules. Guess what the Constitution of the United States says is to happen, when such an event occurs? The Supreme Court of the United States decides. They did. And those who continue to maintain that Gore had the election "stolen" from him are just willfully ignorant.

Still funny, though. They're the same kind of morons who can . . . just for a crazy example . . . they can watch an aircraft crash into a building, cause an enormous fireball and fire, and after seeing said building collapse an hour later, believe the two events (jet plane, collapse) are completely unrelated. It takes a special level of disillusionment to believe those things, and for that--we turn to liberals.

Nutcase,

So, let me get this right...you're smarter and know law better than Scalia, right?

How can anyone trained in law talk this way. This man is incapable of consistent logical thought. He has a political agenda, which includes but also transcends the Republican Party while undermining our founding principals for the benefit of an elite ruling class. That is why they installed him, and Alito, and Thomas, and Roberts. It is equally important to note that many Democrats, including the Clinton's and of course Rockefellar have the same agenda.

We are presented fake choices in fake elections. If that doesn't work then the elections are rigged, preferably locally, but in this case by a highly politicized Court. Labor is nothing, Capital is everything, the fix is in.

Posted by nutcase
* * * *

Here's another one!

These fuckers knew they were establishing precedent with this decision. Lest it ever be turned against the elites, they wrote the decision in such a manner that the flawed legal argument could never be used in any other case. What does that tell you about their fucking motives?

Well, George Bush didn't win Florida. Gore ended up with 266 electorate votes. Gore won Florida, the scotus stopped the counting. Thus this stole the election. It's actually really simple.

also, remember the popular vote? yeah. no one cares about that because it's not how the system works? where's the democracy....no i forgot, there is no democracy here, this is a republic. and a failing one.

Posted by sir_mike
* * * *

One more!!!

Don't know how much stock to put in posters named "Nutcase" and "Ignoramus"--but I'll give them credit for some much-needed comic relief.

"I am not accusing anyone of being ignorant on the issue."

No, but you did accuse me of this:

"It is obvious your special little world is one that cries "foul" at SC decisions, Diebold machines, whatever, when "your" guy loses. If he wins under the identical circumstances, the world is peachy and you are strangely silent."

I don't think you'll find any instances of me blaming Diebold machines, and if crying "foul" means having a legitimate disagreement with a court decision, then I guess I'm guilty of that.

"Don't know how much stock to put in posters named "Nutcase" "

But you have to admit he has a very salient point. How many times does the SC make a decision, only to then state this is ONLY for this one case, and cannot be used a precedent? Does that pass your smell test?

Right is right,

Great post at 11:03. I have wondered the same thing for years. Had the election not been so close, the Supreme Court's decision on one state's procedures would not have been the deciding factor. I think the fact that it was, and that their decision (which was correct) ultimately led to a Bush victory has forever been translated by the liberal mind into "Bush stole the election."

Joe,

Help me out: is it common for the SC to make a decision and then bar its use as a precedent?

"How many times does the SC make a decision, only to then state this is ONLY for this one case, and cannot be used a precedent?"

They didn't use those words. They said their decision was "limited to the present circumstances." Courts say that all the time to avoid having their holdings taken out of context. The argument from Gore's lawyers was that the holding could potentially be extended to invalidate the electoral processes of all states, and I think this was the court's way of quelling that fear.

Joe, thanks. You answered as I posted.

I merely put a question out to the DR asking if the shoe was on the other foot if anyone would still feel that the election was stolen -- even if "their" guy won. I am not accusing anyone of being ignorant on the issue. I just want to know if they'd feel the same if Gore won under identical circumstances, that's all.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-25 11:01 AM


I would be happy Gore won, but I would acknowledge that the election was flawed and would want the flaws removed. I wouldn't defend the flaws like conservatives.

If half a million more people had voted for Bush than Gore, I don't think any on the DR would have bitched at the USSC decision. A revote would have been the best course.

But then, votes don't count. The USSC proved that.

Danforth, I don't deny that the statement you're questioning is worthy of attention. As I continue to read the language surrounding it, it appears as though the court was really getting into the technical reasons for why the specific measures being taken in Florida at that moment (judges with no training counting ballots with no opportunity for others to object) were violative of Equal Protection. I think the court's point in making the statement you questioned at that point was to say that only that factual scenario is violative of equal protection, and that states with similar counting regimes that would never make it to the level Florida did are not being struck down.

"votes don't count. The USSC proved that."

How many votes did their decision cause not to be counted? Be specific with numbers.

...But Gore didn't actually win Florida....factually, or practically...so why are you people still arguing about this? You sound like a bunch of German fascists sitting around talking about how the German Army didn't really lose WW1, but their politicians stabbed them in the back and betrayed them....This is Hitler logic...you guys are engaging in it...WAKE UP!

I would be happy Gore won, but I would acknowledge that the election was flawed and would want the flaws removed. I wouldn't defend the flaws like conservatives.

If half a million more people had voted for Bush than Gore, I don't think any on the DR would have bitched at the USSC decision. A revote would have been the best course.
* * * *

The "flaw" in the Florida election had to do with the Democratic voter guides that were distributed on the East Coast. You see, Florida has millions of retirees. Many of them are picked up at retirement homes and driven to the polls. For years, the Repub and the Dem parties have supplied voters guides, because it's assumed that such people who spend a lot of their time out of state might not be up to speed on local issues and races.

But in 2000, the voter guides distributed by the Dems said to vote for Gore, but the number that corresponded to Gore in the guide was actually next to Pat Buchanan's name. So Buchanan--an anti-semite, by many accounts--won more votes in heavily Jewish Palm Beach county than the rest of the state combined, largely because a whole lot of Democratic voter retards just went down the ballot, punching the numbers they saw in the voter guide rather than reading the ballot. That's why at noon on election day, the Dem lawyers were running around screaming election fraud, even though polls would be open another 8 hours. It wasn't fraud--it was that the Dems are dumbasses, as were so many of their voters.

A voters guide. That's it. Frequently history turns on such things. For want of a nail, the shoe was lost . . .

Joe,

Great explanation. Thanks again.

Another Q: could they have specified which parts are (forgive me) precedent-able, and which weren't, or must it be blanket?

"It wasn't fraud--it was that the Dems are dumbasses"

Bingo.

I would be happy Gore won, but I would acknowledge that the election was flawed and would want the flaws removed. I wouldn't defend the flaws like conservatives.

So, bob, you would be here today saying the Gore stole the election -- if, as before stated, all else being equal?

"The "flaw" in the Florida election had to do with the Democratic voter guides that were distributed on the East Coast."

Agreed, but that was only one of the flaws, and not the major flaw. The major flaw is that it has been proven that the machines can be hacked. Conservatives seem to be ok with that. I am not ok with that. I don't think a voting machine should have any doubts as to the votes it records.

That is the major flaw. That flaw has not been addressed. You are fine with it--I am not.

That's the difference between us. That, and about 40 IQ points.

;-)

I got real educatated about the Florida election, and was unpleasantly surprised by a lot of things about it.

I grew up just south of Tampa, and voted absentee in every election from 1986-2000. I was in the Army most of those years, and didn't learn until the 2000 debacle that my votes never were counted at all--they are only opened in the event of a close race. Which is why, as the days wore on and Gore's goons were tossing out all the absentee ballots they could find "before they could be opened and counted", I was asking myself, why the hell aren't they ALREADY opened, and counted?

I was voting all those years, and never had my votes counted. Where were all the legal aid lawyers complaining about how I had been disinfranchised? Oh--never mind--they were all busy making sure my Army pals from the Sunshine State didn't get their votes counted in 2000, either.

"It wasn't fraud--it was that the Dems are dumbasses, as were so many of their voters."

er...as opposed to the party that voted for Dumbya?????

"could they have specified which parts are (forgive me) precedent-able, and which weren't, or must it be blanket?"

The fact that they did not specify, I think, does not require it to be a blanket ban on its use as precedent. The opinion is broken up into sections, as there were many different Equal Protection issues requiring interpretation by the Court. I think that if anyone did want to use the opinion as precedent, they could make a good argument that the limitation of the opinion to those facts was itself limited to the specific Equal Protection claim they were deciding in that portion of the opinion. Whether a court would be receptive of that argument, I suppose, has yet to be seen.

The major flaw is that it has been proven that the machines can be hacked

"Can be hacked" (what can't be?) is not the same as "has been hacked". What is your point?

Danni,

Well, at least the people who voted for W could actually figure out how to vote....

That's the difference between us. That, and about 40 IQ points.

Don't be so hard on yourself, bOoB. You may be able to narrow that gap if you study enough.

The salient point is that corruption is slowly insidiously destroying this country. Still not as bad here as most of the world, but when it reaches as high as the Supreme Court, decline is certain.

While our country declines, elites are rolling in it. Look at what Countrywide, United Health, and ExxonMobile, to name only three, have done to their constituencies. Corporations operate like Divine Kings in our not so distant past. They are above the very laws, which they bribe politicians to write.

For this model to be successful it is necessary to fill the Courts with political shills, of the Friedman bent. Rush Limbaugh pounds on this point, on or off Oxycontin. A poor Florida Citizen is facing twenty years in prison for carrying the same drug in his pocket, which had been prescribed to his girlfriend. They charged him with trafficking because he wouldn't cop a plea deal. Any wonder black people cheered when a RICH OJ beat his murder rap.

The larger point is that the Courts are NOT DEMOCRATIC. Since the profit motive drives Courts and Prisons now, there exists one set of outcomes for RICH people and another set of outcomes for POOR people. What would our founding Father's say about this development.

How many votes did their decision cause not to be counted? Be specific with numbers.

Posted by JOE at 2008-04-25 11:26 AM | Reply


The half million more of the national vote that went for Gore over Bush.

Those half million weren't as valid as the 500 tainted lead in Florida.

A revote would have been the America way. A revote would have found out the will of the people. Unfortunately, the will of the people means nothing when the government wants something else. The people had absolutely no say in the 2000 election. Bush was appointed--he won no election. A man with any integrity would have conceded the election in such circumstances---losing nationally by half a million votes, and a flawed Florida election. At least ask for a revote in Florida. But No--Bush acted like the punk he is and the punk we've had as President for 7 years.

er...as opposed to the party that voted for Dumbya?????

Posted by danni
* * * *

Yes.

er...as opposed to the party that voted for Dumbya?????

So clever, that Danni. Why can't the rest of us be so witty?

The major flaw is that it has been proven that the machines can be hacked.

It was only proven under ideal conditions, not real life ones. ATM's can also be hacked under ideal circumstances that don't typically exist as they are realistically used. Any machine can be hacked... period.

The trick is... can you show that they WERE hacked?

Thought not.

er...as opposed to the party that voted for Dumbya?????

So clever, that Danni. Why can't the rest of us be so witty?

The half million more of the national vote that went for Gore over Bush.

Those half million weren't as valid as the 500 tainted lead in Florida.

For once you are right, bOoB. The Constitution says the electoral college elects the president, not the people. It doesn't matter what Gore's lead was in the popular vote. Get over it.

"The half million more of the national vote that went for Gore over Bush."

Then your problem is with our electoral process at large, not with a Supreme Court decision that dealt with recounts of one state. The popular vote does not decide the election.

Don't be so hard on yourself, bOoB. You may be able to narrow that gap if you study enough.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-25 11:39 AM


One of these days you'll be able to count that high. Just count all your fingers and toes, then add 23.

;-)

A revote would have been the America way. A revote would have found out the will of the people. Unfortunately, the will of the people means nothing when the government wants something else. The people had absolutely no say in the 2000 election. Bush was appointed--he won no election. A man with any integrity would have conceded the election in such circumstances---losing nationally by half a million votes, and a flawed Florida election. At least ask for a revote in Florida. But No--Bush acted like the punk he is and the punk we've had as President for 7 years.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob
* * * *

He did win the election. He shouldn't have to concede anything; he won Florida by 500+ votes, therefore he won the state.

Had Al Gore won Tennessee, he wins the election. Had the Dems not voted for Buchanan instead of Gore, he wins the election. Had the Clintons not busted down Elian Gonzales' with SWAT teams to send him back to Cuba, Gore wins the election. Had Gore spent the last couple of days in Ohio and Florida, instead of California and New York, Al Gore wins the election.

In the end, Al Gore was too stupid to be president, and didn't deserve to be. His voters in Palm Beach county were too stupid to have been allowed to vote in the first place, so--funny enough--their votes for Buchanan didn't really count. And when the candidate and his voters are more moronic than Bush and his people--Godalmighty, that is really saying something.

Bob,

So, when more people voted against Bill Clinton then for him, he should have conceded to Perot the Republican, whoever that was, and submitted to the will of the people, then?

Scalia, is a PIMP for the Republician party, this fuck is a disgrace to the Supreme Court. Scalia an his Moral Police an the Conservative Right is the reason our Country, that has 5% of the population of the World has 25% of all the prisoners in the World.

USA, USA, USA, Were Number 1, were number 1 what a FUCKING DISGRACE!!!!!!! This war on Drug policy is a joke!!!!

Posted by celisary


Yeah, that's right, don't give a person who happens to hold one of the most rigidly vetted processes of attaining the job, a bit of the benefit of a doubt. I believe any and all of the justices who say that they don't allow their political persuasions to get in the way of their decision making.

When weighing a case using the law it becomes rather natural to rule based on law. And, did you not read the part where 7 out of the 9 justices ruled that Florida's way of recounting votes was unconstitutional? Did you also miss the part where Gore was the one who called for the courts to decide it?

Like he said, get over it.

Popular vote doesn't mean anything, electoral college does, specifically to to override the effect of populous centers overwhelming less densely populated regions

They still recounted all the votes in Fl. even though it wouldn't have mattered....Gore didn't win.

so boob, please tell us how votes don't count.

when all was said and done, when they were all counted , and applied properly to the electoral college system ....Bush had more than Gore.

so please do tell.

Scalia is a shit but he is an intelligent shit who is consistent. While I dislike his views in many ways he does represent a segment of US society and should therefore be on the supreme court. My biggest problem is there is now Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito which are too many social conservative votes for the court although I have my suspicions Roberts will move to the center in a few years. Alito is a fucking joke and is always licking Roberts' ball sack. Although he has a cute horny looking daughter.

Posted by furio


Furio, thank you for an honest post on this subject. And by honest I do not mean your other posts are dishonest. Like I just wrote a bit earlier, I believe all of the justices rule according to law and not their political stances. I find it pretty insulting and naive to claim that they rule along party lines.

He is lock, stock and barrel part of the Republican scourge that we will be saddled with until his passing.

But then, votes don't count. The USSC proved that.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob
* * * *

They do count, and they were counted. Numerous times. Same answer every time: Bush won Florida.

I take that back--there were hundres of votes NOT counted--the ones that Gore's mob squad was able to get thrown out on technicalities, because they came from overseas military bases.

I wonder how history might've turned out differently had this happened: the Supreme Court of Florida orders a revote of this county or that one, depending on which ones they think would've gone Gore. And Gore narrowly wins THAT election, but it turns out that Gore had LOST the first one. Would they have revoted the Florida panhandle counties, many voters of which stayed home after the state was called for Gore, even though those polls are in the central time zone, and still open? How about Sarasota and Manatee Counties?

Would've been a disaster. The retards who run the Democratic Party can't even print up a voters guide. Those same dumbasses have created this abortion of a primary system that is now destroying the party. Why you think these retards would've handled a 9/11 or a Katrina in a better fashion than the Bush people have is beyond me.

They can't even publish a voters guide.

Joe

Then your problem is with our electoral process at large, not with a Supreme Court decision that dealt with recounts of one state. The popular vote does not decide the election.

Posted by JOE at 2008-04-25 11:45 AM | Reply


My problem is with both. The USSC should have let the State sort out the election, or stepped in to force a revote. To make the decision themselves was Bullshit. To say otherwise shows extreme partisanship.

I would say that most people want an honest election. But then I keep seeing conservatives campainging to keep things the way they are. I want to trust the election process, and since 2000, that has not been the case.

There were no liberals crying about stolen elections in 1968 when Nixon won. There were no liberals whining about stolen elections in 1972 when Nixon won again. There was no liberal whining about stolen elections in 1980 when Reagan won. The was no liberal crying about stolen electon in 1984 when Reagan won again. There was no liberal whining about stolen elections in 1988 when Bush the 1st won. Only in 2000 and in 2004.

Yet the conservatives play it like after every election liberals whine about cheating. That makes me think they are more interested in keeping the cheating going rather than fixing the process to ensure fair election, and not leave the voting process up to 9 people.

Both parties should be calling for hack proof voting machines.

"I believe any and all of the justices who say that they don't allow their political persuasions to get in the way of their decision making."

In related news, Everlong also believes in Unicorns.

RIR

As stated--I guess you didn't see it.

The half million surplus for Gore was not as important as the tainted 500 for Bush.

But all those votes were discarde--thrown out--invalidated--not one vote that was cast in 2000 counted--noe--zero.

Those 500 votes in Florida didn't elect Bush. The electoral college didn't elect Bush. Nothing in the Constitution says Bush should have been President.

The only votes that counted in 2000 were the votes on the USSC.

The best way would have been to have a revote. That would have been fair. That would have found out the will of the people of Florida. If you were so sure Bush would have won--you would have been for a revote too. You know Bush would have lost. Party above country--the republican mantra. Fuck fairness---the republican motto.

Great news...Florida is going to have a paper trail.
Great news...Jeb is no longer governor of Florida.

Think there is a connection there????

Tell me 2000 wasn't stolen and then explain why Jeb refused to allow Florida to have a paper trail as required under the Florida Constitution.

The best way would have been to have a revote. That would have been fair. That would have found out the will of the people of Florida. If you were so sure Bush would have won--you would have been for a revote too. You know Bush would have lost. Party above country--the republican mantra. Fuck fairness---the republican motto.
Posted by Buffalo_Bob


Gore could have pursued a Florida recount. Instead he took it to the courts. Get over it already.

Bob, I agree with much of your post, except for the part about the SC decision. There were equal protection claims before the court. The result of those claims was that Florida's recount procedure allowing untrained judges to count ballots with no opportunity for objection was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has every right to decide such an issue. I'm sorry that the ultimate result of their decision wound up being the deciding factor in the election, and that it did not go the way you wanted it to. To be honest, I would rather have seen Al Gore become president than George Bush. I didn't vote for either of them, but to claim that I only support the right of the SC to determine equal protection claims because I am "partisan" is absurd.

The was no liberal crying about stolen electon in 1984 when Reagan won again

Well, duh. Even a dumbest lib has to realize he doesn't have much of a case when the winning candidate takes 49 of 50 states.

Thank you for your insightful input, bOoB.

Joe

Fuck the USSC--they don't elect Presidents. They should have forced a revote. There is no defense for a USSC to elect a President. There is no circumstance in the Constitution that gives them that power. Votes don't count. They proved that. If you can take the vote away from the people--fuck the USSC. No matter who wins.

Bob,

you post stuff, and I think that is the stupidest thing I've ever read...or ever will read. I think I will never see anything stupider than this.

and then...

you post again, and I'm reminded.....never say never.


They RECOUNTED FLORIDA...because the media was drooling for Gore to have actually won Florida...oh god what a story that would make. Turns out, Bush won.

so, last chance.....since they counted them, and Gore had less.....how did the actual votes not count?

Nothing in the Constitution says Bush should have been President.

WHich country's constitution are you talking about bOoB? Because there is something in ours that says he should have been elected. It's called the majority of votes. Check it out.

Don't try to apply a non-american constitution to American elections.

There is no defense for a USSC to elect a President

Again, bOoB, you are right. That's why they are not allowed to. Thanks for stating the obvious.

Goatman

As usual you make up your own strawman and think you made a point.

I mentioned all the elections republicans won up to 2000 since Eisenhower--not just 1984 dUMmy. The point was that liberals have only said the elections were flawed in 2000 and 2004, not all elections like conservatives like to say evey time those elections are brought up. Not just 1984 DummY. What a morOOn you are.

"Fuck the USSC--they don't elect Presidents"

You're right. And they didn't. They held a specific method of recounting the ballots to be unconstitutional, which it is their right to do. The fact that the election was so close wasn't their fault. The fact that both candidates had tallied such a close number of electoral votes up to but not including Florida is not the doing of the court. The votes of millions of Americans were cast and counted leaving Florida as the deciding state. Florida's votes were counted too. All the court did was stop them from re-counting hundreds of times till Gore got the answer he wanted, and held a specific method of recounting to be unconstitutional. I'm sorry you equate this to deciding the election. I for one think that Americans decided the election, and that the holding of the court was correct.

so, last chance.....since they counted them, and Gore had less.....how did the actual votes not count?

While you are answering that one, bOoB, please tell us how all these different flavors of recounts in which Bush won equates to the USSC electing the president as you claim?

I mentioned all the elections republicans won up to 2000 since Eisenhower--not just 1984 dUMmy.

Yes you did. And I mentioned the 1984 election. Again, thanks for stating the obvious.

Y'all debate just one aspect of the stolen election of 2000 and the repeat in 2004.

Diebold is where the theft was made.
The president of the company virtually predicted what he would be doing. That's why Jeb always refused to allow a paper trail.

What a morOOn you are.

Ahem . . . If you are going to call someone a moron, it makes you look less of one if you spell it properly.

Just saying . . .

Goatman

Fuck the USSC--they don't elect Presidents. They should have forced a revote. There is no defense for a USSC to elect a President. There is no circumstance in the Constitution that gives them that power. Votes don't count. They proved that. If you can take the vote away from the people--fuck the USSC. No matter who wins.

The half million more of the national vote that went for Gore over Bush.

Those half million weren't as valid as the 500 tainted lead in Florida.


The best way would have been to have a revote. That would have been fair. That would have found out the will of the people of Florida. If you were so sure Bush would have won--you would have been for a revote too. You know Bush would have lost. Party above country--the republican mantra. Fuck fairness---the republican motto

That's all your're worth dummy. See if you can figure it out the second time around. Need three times? Four?

"Diebold is where the theft was made" ? Wha?

Danni - you're from Florida aren't you? Ever hear about that Radio Show "Florida or Germany"

I did it again....

come on now...I'll get it this time....Never say never.


Boob, should we count the votes of whoever is running that smokestack on the Moon?

The best way would have been to have a revote. That would have been fair. That would have found out the will of the people of Florida. If you were so sure Bush would have won--you would have been for a revote too. You know Bush would have lost. Party above country--the republican mantra. Fuck fairness---the republican motto
That's all your're worth dummy. See if you can figure it out the second time around. Need three times? Four?
Posted by Buffalo_Bob


Maybe more times because you need to understand it was GORE who insisted on court action, not the Republicans. As mentioned by another poster, Gore royally f-ed it up for himself right up to the end, with the USSC ruling. But in any case you need to get over it.

That's all your're worth dummy. See if you can figure it out the second time around. Need three times? Four?


You could spam your thoughts a million times and I'd still be no closer to unlocking the workings of your warped mind than I was after reading it the first.

But I noticed that your schtick has turned to spamming lately, so knock yourself out, dude. Though no one else does, you seem to think it is quite clever. I guess that's what happens when one's brain stalls and is unable to come up with an original thought -- they spam the old ones. *yawn*

you people are all braindamaged. no one here knows what they're talking about.


i'm going back to kos.

i'm going back to kos.

I would, but they probably wouldn't let me back in. Unlike the DR, they seem to have a problem with this freedom of speech thing. Preaching to the sheeple -- er, choir -- is their thing. Who needs that. Oh, yeah, sheeple I guess.

Sir Mike - on the contrary, people in the DR generally do know what they are talking about, Left and Right, even allowing for the more extreme and batshit=crazy types. I think what you are missing is that "warm bath" feeling of the DK where there is not a similar debate.

OK you can go. Have a nice little weekend with no dissension.

you people are all braindamaged. no one here knows what they're talking about.

i'm going back to kos.

Posted by sir_mike at 2008-04-25 12:41 PM

Actually, almost everyone here has pretty good insight (from their political perspective), its just that you don't like the politics of about 1/3 of the posters. Kos is a safer choice for you, since you don't have to think.

Don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out.

you people are all braindamaged. no one here knows what they're talking about.

i'm going back to kos.

Posted by sir_mike at 2008-04-25 12:41 PM

Actually, almost everyone here has pretty good insight (from their political perspective), its just that you don't like the politics of about 1/3 of the posters. Kos is a safer choice for you, since you don't have to think.

Don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out.

The only reason you're asking for a revote, is because your guy lost the election. How typical. Keep it tied up in the courts until you count all the votes you want and throw out all the ones you don't. Then when that doesn't work, let's just have a re-vote. And you accuse REPUBLICANS of wanting a banana republic? It was you who wanted to turn the Florida election into a coup, not us. It was you who wanted the courts to overturn the VOTERS, not us. And it was you who wanted to overturn the VOTERS, and the COURTS, with a re-do, not us.

What a retard. It's a psychological disorder, methinks. But it's fun to watch. Coming on the DR whenever there's an Election 2000 or a 9/11 thread is like going to the zoo.

sorry for the double, I only hit it once...

Amazing that you fell for scalias obvious trap. Ask yourself what part was 7-2 and which one was 5-4?

Do a little research...

Posted by Alexandrite

Was the Supreme Court based on the Justices on the bench in 2000 or the ones Bush added later?

Bush won while the court leaned the opposite way?

"like going to the zoo."

who has a monitor wipe.

please RiR not when I'm taking a sip of iced coffee please.

damn this shit is hard to clean.

Sir Mike - on the contrary, people in the DR generally do know what they are talking about, Left and Right, even allowing for the more extreme and batshit=crazy types.

Posted by MrFair at 2008-04-25 12:44 PM

Actually, almost everyone here has pretty good insight (from their political perspective), its just that you don't like the politics of about 1/3 of the posters.

Posted by Rightocenter at 2008-04-25 12:48 PM

Well said, and I think that is why we keep coming back.

I do a decent amount of regulatory and legislative practice, and have had to read Gore v. Bush more times then I can count.

One thing that people on both sides of the argument usually ignore is that SCOTUS had to decide two questions: 1) Were the recounts, as they were currently being conducted, constitutional and 2) if not, what was the remedy.

The Court ruled 7-2 that there were equal protection issues with the recounts themselves, noting that ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment," and that SCOFL's recount scheme was theorically fair, but unfair in practice. The Court then ruled on a more ideological (some might say party line) basis, 5-4, that because different standards were seemingly applied to the recount from ballot to ballot, precinct to precinct, and county to county, that no constitutional recount could be fashioned in the time remaining under the FL Constitution for a recount.

The latter vote clearly seems to imply that if the Gore camp had insisted on day 1 that all FL votes be re-counted the same way, then SCOTUS would have let it proceed. It is, however, a per curium decision, and its application was limited to the circumstances at hand.

Bob,

I'm still waiting for you to provide me with the science that claims human embryos aren't alive or human...really, you don't have time to get involved in this thread so heavily, as your assignment is late.

It was impossible from the very start to even conduct a recount. There were computer voting machines with no paper trail. There was simply no way to determine whether the numbers of votes recorded was true. Diebold and the Republicans were laughing about it the whole time. Four years later, next presidential election....still no paper trail.
Even righties have to admit that was virtually a license to steal the election.

"...that no constitutional recount could be fashioned in the time remaining under the FL Constitution for a recount."

Posted by leftcoastlawyer

by that reasoning, would you say that a recount would have been unconstitutional even if there was direct evidence available at the time that there was a good reason for a recount that was better than merely saying it was a close race?

I knew from the day after the election that
1. Bush was smarter than he was playing us for when he said, "cooler heads will prevail" in response to Gore flip flopping over conceding the race.
2. We were going to be in a lot of trouble.

I present exhibit A the parallel thread "Clinton Claims Popular Vote Lead"

count the number of posts that read something like....

but if you count the votes this way she is leading, and retorded by - but if you count the votes this way he is leading.


given the evidence, those truly skewed so far to the left will never let this rest, there is always another way to count the votes in that reality.

Even righties have to admit that was virtually a license to steal the election.

Posted by danni

Don't forget caging lists, Fox News declaring Gore the winner in FL before the polls were closed nationally... Katherine Harris as sec of state and FL campaign manager for bush, rules for recount being written in Florida months before the election, etc.

Four years later, next presidential election....still no paper trail.
Even righties have to admit that was virtually a license to steal the election.


Diebold, Diebold, Diebold. Danni, did it ever occur to you that if the voting machines could be hacked by Republicans to their advantage, that the Democrats could do it, too? (or are they not smart enough?) Maybe they lost by an even larger margin than 500 votes because they didn't hack enough machines.

"But oh, no, it doesn't work that way"

Danni

(forgive me for repeating myself.

It was impossible from the very start to even conduct a recount. There were computer voting machines with no paper trail. There was simply no way to determine whether the numbers of votes recorded was true.

Up to the 2000 election, all counties in Florida were allowed to choose their method of voting-paper chad, ink marked, computer voting, etc. Without exception, the counties that had the biggest problems, Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia, were controlled by the Democrats. Like it or not, those problems were not made by the dreaded "Bush crime cabal."

Diebold and the Republicans were laughing about it the whole time.

Funny you should say that, Diebold didn't get into the election business until 2001, but don't let that get in the way of your fantasy.

Four years later, next presidential election....still no paper trail.

That was a decision by the Florida Election Commission, which was headed in 2002-2004 by, drumroll please, a Democrat.

Even righties have to admit that was virtually a license to steal the election.

Posted by danni at 2008-04-25 01:22 PM

Absolutely, and it should change.

"That was a decision by the Florida Election Commission, which was headed in 2002-2004 by, drumroll please, a Democrat."

No, the paper trail was enacted under Crist by the legislature. That was how the Republicans screwed up the Dem primary date. They attached the changed date to the paper trail bill.
The State Constitution already required a recountable election system so really the Florida election was illegal anyway.

by that reasoning, would you say that a recount would have been unconstitutional even if there was direct evidence available at the time that there was a good reason for a recount that was better than merely saying it was a close race?

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2008-04-25 01:26 PM

Don't confuse SCOTUS saying that the recount ordered by SCOFLA was unconsitutional with a hypothetical recount of all FL. counties done in exactly the same way for any legal reason, close call or outright fraud. SCOTUS' problem with the 2000 election was that the recounts were being handled differently in different counties and different precinct's within those counties. I am certainly no fan of Bush, but a plain reading of the Equal Protection Clause pretty much compels the conclusion that they were right, under those particular circumstances. Even David Boies had to admit as much in a question from Scalia's good buddy, Ginsberg, that that was the case. I thought overall Bois did an excellent job of skirting the issue during oral argument, but that to me was the killer.

In related news, Everlong also believes in Unicorns.

Posted by Danforth


And Danforth has absolutely no faith in humanity as long as they are politically conservative. It's truly pathetic to have such a lack of trust in a person's own words. How does it feel walking thru life not believing half the population? One of the left's favorite sayings is that conservatives can't think for themselves yet they will buy into anything from a democrat and simply dismiss anything from the right as a lie.

So I read this far to catch up. Gawd, the blinders-wearing righties are out in force again, good-mouthing Scalia as they good-mouth Bush. Scalia is just one of five political hacks who saw no problem in destroying our nation - maybe civilization - by seating their master. You do not honor Scalia any more than you honor Bush. You retch.

As for Demos hacking Diebold machines, it doesn't work that way. Diebold is a Republican outfit that saves all hacking rights for the same forces that perpetrated Bush. herm

In related news, Everlong also believes in Unicorns.

Posted by Danforth


And Danforth has absolutely no faith in humanity as long as they are politically conservative. It's truly pathetic to have such a lack of trust in a person's own words. How does it feel walking thru life not believing half the population? One of the left's favorite sayings is that conservatives can't think for themselves yet they will buy into anything from a democrat and simply dismiss anything from the right as a lie.

So I read this far to catch up. Gawd, the blinders-wearing righties are out in force again, good-mouthing Scalia as they good-mouth Bush. Scalia is just one of five political hacks who saw no problem in destroying our nation - maybe civilization - by seating their master. You do not honor Scalia any more than you honor Bush. You retch.

As for Demos hacking Diebold machines, it doesn't work that way. Diebold is a Republican outfit that saves all hacking rights for the same forces that perpetrated Bush. herm

The Supremes 2000 decision followed a systematic doctoring of the vote, which still left Bush slightly behind. Exit polls clearly showed Gore in the lead. But Bush Senior said "wait" with a smirk on his face. Jeb and Katherine worked furiously behind the scenes to manufacture a false result. They generated increasingly more generalized "Fake Felony Lists" until they had enough "felons" by any match criteria to effect the outcome, the lists were heavily weighted towards poor and black communities; they distributed more voting machines per capita in Republican districts than in Democratic; finally they "tweeked" electronic voting machines, in those districts where small changes reversed results. All of this occurs against a backdrop of gerrymandering, which both parties practice. This practice distorts election results more than any other, rendering every vote to have a different value.

Most of these practices are illegal, but remain unpunished, since laws are mainly intended to keep poor people in their place. To put it another way, the highest standard of proof would be required to prosecute a wealthy person, particularly if they are politically adroit. For the average schmuck, if you can't prove you're innocent, you're prison bound. Ask any black person or deadbeat dad. Nothing personal, just good for business.

No, the paper trail was enacted under Crist by the legislature. That was how the Republicans screwed up the Dem primary date. They attached the changed date to the paper trail bill.

Posted by danni at 2008-04-25 01:48 PM

So Crist, who was elected govenor in 2007, got in a time machine, went back to 2002-2004 to ensure that there was no paper trail for the 2004 elections (which is what you were referencing and I was responding to) and simultaneously planted the seeds for the Dems to fuck up the 2008 primaries by moving the dates for the Florida primary in contravention of DNC rules so that his cronies could kill the attempt to change the date back by attaching it to the paper trail bill. Gotcha.

Next time, Danni, get your dates right before sounding foolish.

Diebold is a Republican outfit that saves all hacking rights for the same forces that perpetrated Bush. herm

Really? I saw some on this forum accuse Clinton and Diebold rigging an election.

Got a link to substantiate your claim, herm? Or is this just your usual paranoid drivel?

Scalia, Rehnquist, Thomas and company will all be remembered in the future mainly for the decision in this case. I highly doubt the future will remember them kindly. Over our 200+ year history, few rulings by the Court have been so brazenly political. No judgement by the Court in the last 50 years has done as much to increase pessimism among Americans as to the fairness of our democracy. When future law students review the work of the Rehnquist Court, this case will be the 800 pound gorilla dominating everyone's attention. Scalia probably knows that, - which is why he is encouraging everyone to "just get over it".

Nutcase,

Exit polls showed Barack Obomba winning PA....So what?

You don't need laws to keep poor people in place...they find their own place, either through teenage pregnancies, extended illness, addiction, or ignorance. Only one of these is beyond their control....

Envirofascists,

I know, Gore really won Fl by 2 million votes while inventing the internet, he has a very small carbon footprint, and the globe is getting hotter every fucking day because of vast amounts of CO2, which, because it's produced by cars, plants can't use for photosynthesis......It's all so clear now.

Yet, while being brilliant in all these things, he didn't ask for a statewide recount, but instead went for targeted recounts through the courts. I know I'm not as smart as AlGore, and who is, but if I've got more votes in a state, I ask for a full recount. Hmmmm......

COLUMBUS - The head of a company vying to sell voting machines in Ohio told Republicans in a recent fund-raising letter that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

The Aug. 14 letter from Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold Inc. - who has become active in the re-election effort of President Bush - prompted Democrats this week to question the propriety of allowing O'Dell's company to calculate votes in the 2004 presidential election.

O'Dell attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors - known as Rangers and Pioneers - at the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month. The next week, he penned invitations to a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser to benefit the Ohio Republican Party's federal campaign fund - partially benefiting Bush - at his mansion in the Columbus suburb of Upper Arlington.

The letter went out the day before Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, also a Republican, was set to qualify Diebold as one of three firms eligible to sell upgraded electronic voting machines to Ohio counties in time for the 2004 election.

Blackwell's announcement is still in limbo because of a court challenge over the fairness of the selection process by a disqualified bidder, Sequoia Voting Systems.

In his invitation letter, O'Dell asked guests to consider donating or raising up to $10,000 each for the federal account that the state GOP will use to help Bush and other federal candidates - money that legislative Democratic leaders charged could come back to benefit Blackwell.

Published on Thursday, August 28, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer

Boo!!!
Scared ya, didn't I?

Sincerely,

Diebold, Inc.

As for Demos hacking Diebold machines, it doesn't work that way. Diebold is a Republican outfit that saves all hacking rights for the same forces that perpetrated Bush. herm

Posted by herm
* * * *

Really?
Shows you what I know. I thought it was a publicly traded company that made most of their money selling office supplies. I had no idea they were just another one of Bush's minions.

Learn something here every day.

Published on Thursday, August 28, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer

Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2008-04-25 02:07 PM

C'mon Rogue, you are smarter then that...that story had a much legs as Boob's Smokestacks on the Moon.

"that story had a much legs as Boob's Smokestacks on the Moon."

RoC - I'm not saying that Diebold was involved in any vast conspiracy... I don't know. But the story does have legs - the fundraising letter from Diebold's CEO exists. He was a very ardent Bush supporter.

That doesn't mean he and/or the company participated in any fraudulent activity - but it is certainly a reason to make one stop and think for a minute.

"Next time, Danni, get your dates right before sounding foolish."

"(which is what you were referencing and I was responding to)"


We were discussing the 2000 election. You said that there was no paper trail because of the Florida Elections Commission, I just said that the governor and legislature created the paper trail that we are supposed to have now so I would assume that the governor and the legislature could have done it earlier....but Jeb refused. I do not believe the Elections Commission could have created one because it would have required funding and that would require the Legislature. So basicly you made up that nonsense about the Elections Commission and the Dem that was chairman....but nice try anyway.

Oh, and yes the paper trail bill did also contain the date change for the primary and yes the Dems in the Legislature did vote for it reluctantly because the Republican majority refused to seperate the two things.

We were discussing the 2000 election.

and

Four years later, next presidential election....still no paper trail.

That was a decision by the Florida Election Commission, which was headed in 2002-2004 by, drumroll please, a Democrat.

Hey Danni,

don't look know but I think they're eating your lunch

or in l33t speak, you've been p0wned

"Wrong again. It was never recommended by the FLAEC, so the Legislature never voted on it and Jeb never had a bill to sign."

They did not require a recommendation from the Elections Commission and there were MILLIONS of Democrats screaming about it. The REPUBLICAN controlled Legislature refused to bring a bill to the floor to enact one.
If Jeb Bush wanted a pap0er trail there would have been a paper trail.

RoC you can pretend differently but it makes you look silly or worse.

I love a good back and forth

dodge parry weave

reminds me of that donald duck as robin hood cartoon.

you people are all braindamaged. no one here knows what they're talking about.

i'm going back to kos.

Posted by sir_mike

Wow. Talk about close-minded. I sure hope sir mike doesn't like using the comment about righties having a one-track mind and we only listen to conservative views. The Kos!?! Give me a break, sir mike. Enjoy your circle jerk over there because that's all it is

Who were the five Justices that voted one-way?

And, I thought the Justices in 2000 were leaning one way and Bush made them lean the other way.

Who cheated and switched sides?

Diebold also sells ATM machines. Does ANYONE really think a bank would buy a hackable ATM machine????? Does ANYONE think the software holes are due to poor design????

25% of the country will vote Republican, no matter who their candidate is. 35% of the country will blindly vote for the Democratic candidate. 40% of the voters are Independent. If gerrymandering were eliminated and other vote rigging tools, the Republicans would slowly dissappear. The numbers are against them.

Diebold machines are DESIGNED to be hacked, for the explicit purpose of maintaining GOP control of our corrupt Government. Diebold's President has stated so publically and their field service staff is run by a felon.

Diebold machines are DESIGNED to be hacked, for the explicit purpose of maintaining GOP control of our corrupt Government. Diebold's President has stated so publically ...

Do you have a credible link to that quote?

BTW there was a bill proposed in Congress to require a paper trail, the Republicans blocked it in committee. One has to wonder why????

As for Demos hacking Diebold machines, it doesn't work that way. Diebold is a Republican outfit that saves all hacking rights for the same forces that perpetrated Bush. herm
Posted by herm


Herm - 2000 or 2004?

BTW there was a bill proposed in Congress to require a paper trail, the Republicans blocked it in committee. One has to wonder why????

Posted by danni



When?

Diebold machines are DESIGNED to be hacked, for the explicit purpose of maintaining GOP control of our corrupt Government. Diebold's President has stated so publically and their field service staff is run by a felon.

Posted by nutcase
* * * *

Wow. Who knew that the Republicans had so many adept hackers? Whenever I see someone accused of breaking into computers to do this or that, the first words that comes to mind are: hippie liberal. Usually they're twenty-something anarcho types who ride bikes, eat a lot of granola, and wear Birkenstocks without washing their feet. Now I find they're all secret agents of the Bush regime.

Quick question, though--if they're so easily hackable, why don't the Dems try it? They've already got the free-six-pack-of-Colt-45-on- Election-Day demographic sewn up; why not just steal another few thousand votes by writing a Diebold virus? Are the Dems so lazy that they don't even bother to steal elections anymore?

BTW there was a bill proposed in Congress to require a paper trail, the Republicans blocked it in committee. One has to wonder why????

Posted by danni
* * * *

I don't know if that happened or not. But why is it the federal government's responsibility to tell tens of thousands of individual precincts how to handle elections? I didn't get a paper printout of my voting--never have. Even if I did, what difference would it make? If you guys believe that Diebold is fraudulent, how hard would it be to print off a ticket for every voter that is basically a printscreen function that the voter can happily take home, but not count the vote anyway?

Oh, and Nutcase, get a grip dude.

"But why is it the federal government's responsibility to tell tens of thousands of individual precincts how to handle elections?"

Unless, of course, its the Supreme Court telling Florida how to handle one. Then full speed ahead!

LOL!

Well, you're mistaken Petrous. The Court has leaned right since Scalia and Thomas joined it, and that was well before 2000. (The righties were O'Connor, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist.)

They did not require a recommendation from the Elections Commission and there were MILLIONS of Democrats screaming about it. The REPUBLICAN controlled Legislature refused to bring a bill to the floor to enact one.
If Jeb Bush wanted a pap0er trail there would have been a paper trail.

Posted by danni at 2008-04-25 03:28 PM

Wrong again, read your own State Code. 1-S2.004 provides

The standards and specifications outlined herein shall be applied in accordance with Section 101.5601, F.S., to:
(a) Promote efficiency and economy in the purchase, use and sale of voting machines and attendant equipment in the State
(b) Provide a uniform program of accepted minimum requirements
(c) Provide for the maximum of competition on a basis of fair and equal opportunity to persons, companies and corporations interested in the sale and purchase of voting equipment in the State; and
(d) Serve as a guide to governing bodies and as information to suppliers, intended to portray good practices and procedures in governmental purchase, use and sale of voting equipment.

Unless, of course, its the Supreme Court telling Florida how to handle one. Then full speed ahead!

LOL!

Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2008-04-25 04:54 PM

Obviously you either didn't read LCL's 1:14pm post or chose to ignore it.

The Court ruled 7-2 that there were equal protection issues with the recounts themselves, noting that ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment," and that SCOFL's recount scheme was theorically fair, but unfair in practice. The Court then ruled on a more ideological (some might say party line) basis, 5-4, that because different standards were seemingly applied to the recount from ballot to ballot, precinct to precinct, and county to county, that no constitutional recount could be fashioned in the time remaining under the FL Constitution for a recount.

the craziest part of all the hoopla is that many of the contested precincts were in democrat party controlled precincts.

It was an incredibly close election, I don't blame Gore for contesting, but somebody somewhere had to call a stop to the recount forever mania.

The myth of a stolen election is just that.. a myth.

We may have another close election this time and someone will lose. When they do, "get over it!"

The loser doesn't get to have forever recounts.

"...why don't the Dems try it? Are the Dems so lazy that they don't even bother to steal elections anymore?"

I hesitate to argue with the "Rights" of the world, but possibly - only possibly, mind you - Democrats still care about lower case rights, ane ideal of government with consent of the governed. More likely Dems don't hack Repub voting machines because the repub corporocracy owns the technology, lock, stock and modem. The main reason there ain't gonna be no revolution is that all the revolutin' means are in corporate hands.

The Other Right said Gore v. Bush was "spot on" and recited Scalia's rationale to make Americans think that this was not political hackery of the lowest order. herm

"It was an incredibly close election, I don't blame Gore for contesting,"

It was not even close. Gore won by a half million. Gore clearly won Florida. GET OVER IT yourself. herm

"Gore clearly won Florida."

Well, there ya go. To the Dems, Gore "clearly won" in the states of Florida and Denial.

Facts are, Bush is President and has been for 7 years.

Facts are he has split the nation and it will never be the same again.

Factsa are America lost in 2000 and 2004. Only stupid people think they won anything. Look around. This country is finished. It is like a dinosaur too stupid to know it is dead. Bush has proven votes don't count, truth is fiction, innocent is guilty, and killing is giving life and democracy. There is no more America. Bush has never been my President, or the President of millions of other Americans.

Thems the facts. I know you rightists disagree--yet you don't agree with any position with those on the left, and we don't agree with you. Bith side think the other is unAmerican. Two countries is the only solution. I think a good civil war would be good too. 100 million dead should be about right. I would anticipate the rightists winning sch a war, only to be killed by the invading armies of Chinese. This country is dead. It died in Florida in 2000. Bury it and get over it.

I can't wait for the dems to lose again, so I can put another bumper sticker on my car.

"I am a Republican, and we stole the election again, get over it"

Kuma

"I am a Republican, and we stole the election again, get over it"

Kuma

And the aftermath has made you proud?


sick.

Minus advocating civil war, I fear that Bob is right. Regardless of fault, our country has taken one of the most historical nosedives since Nero.


(Although I can find the locus of the problem)

I can't believe the libs are still crying over this. They'll never hesitate to chastise someone who brings up "Clinton's blow job" because it is in the past, but they'll be crying about these two elections forever, it seems. Shit, you never hear mention of the Kennedys stealing the '60 election.

I'm no Scalia fan, but I have to agree with him:

GET OVER IT!

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-25 09:29 AM | Reply |

A stolen election is far more important than a blow job. Why no hate for those that bring up the stupid blow job?

And quite frankly given the implications no we shouldn't get over it. This was serious business, and righties went asleep at the wheel, or just closed they're eyes. Like they do to so many other issues that threaten to beat them in the face.

Gee, really us libs should get over 2000 because we know that though we don't think George Bush was actually elected president we do know that everything has worked out great under his brilliant leadership and we really can't say that Al Gore would have been a far better president.

Danni-
A ficus would have been better than W. Everybody knows that, if it were posed as a question, seriously considered:

Would the US be better off if a ficus had been chosen/elected (for libs/cons) as President in 2000?

Y/N

The exact same thing is going down now in the Dem
selection, is this going into the courts to decide
whom is to be the candidate?? Chew on that one!
Gore put the courts into play on this in 2000.
Popular vote means shit. Who will be decided
in this Dem legal piss match coming, Get Over It!
I hated it then and I hate it now.

The exact same thing is going down now in the Dem
selection, is this going into the courts to decide
whom is to be the candidate?? Chew on that one!
Gore put the courts into play on this in 2000.
Popular vote means shit. Who will be decided
in this Dem legal piss match coming, Get Over It!
I hated it then and I hate it now.

Double post not intended RP5

Gee, really us libs should get over 2000

Yes, y'all really should Danni. A majority -- no matter how razor thin -- is still a majority. Sorry you dems couldn't get 500 more voters out there, but don't cry "stolen election" because you didn't.

Goatman-
You rely on the results of the autopsy of the 2000 election that you prefer, but the fact remains that the election was decided in a 5/4 decision of the Supreme Court (ie, the vote count was stopped).

Goatman,

Bradblog has published extensive documentation of voter fraud in Florida and Ohio. HBO produced a show with similar information. Greg Pallast's books have also documented these crimes.

WAHHHHHHHHH WAHHHHHHHH!

My pussy hurts!

You rely on the results of the autopsy of the 2000 election that you prefer, but the fact remains that the election was decided in a 5/4 decision of the Supreme Court

No. The court decided on the constitutionality of the way the votes were counted. It did not decide the outcome of the election.

Using your logic, you can say that the Metro in WDC that took the justices to work that day decided the vote, because without it, the USSC could not have convened and made their decision.

dblog has published extensive documentation of voter fraud in Florida and Ohio. HBO produced a show with similar information. Greg Pallast's books have also documented these crimes.

No one but SAR had the guts to answer my questin upthread. Will ou, nutcase?

If all else in the election were the same except the parties/candidates were reversed, would you still feel that the election was stolen? Would you be as vociferous about it as you are now?

You rely on the results of the autopsy of the 2000 election that you prefer,

What "autopsy" can you present that had Gore as the winner, except of course the one where he wanted to recount only the democratic counties. (what a piece of shit hypocrisy that was on his part, BTW)

"If all else in the election were the same except the parties/candidates were reversed, would you still feel that the election was stolen?"

I'd want a verifiable paper trail, regardless. Without it, it doesn't matter what party you are.

Hey...for all the computer experts: I've heard folks talk about wanting an "open source code" for the counting machines. What exactly does that mean?

I'd want a verifiable paper trail, regardless.

That doesn't answer my question, but I'd rather have a deflection than a dishonest answer, so that's OK.

If Al Gore were allowed to be President, our country would be ruined by now.

But John McCain would win every single electoral vote this election.

You liberals should consider yourselves fortunate.

"That doesn't answer my question"

I'm an Independent, what do you want?

Besides, sure it answers your question. Those election results will pale compared to the damage done with unverifiable votes.

btw...I think Bush won.

My main complaint was regarding the Republican goons (read: staffers) who staged that near-riot at the counting house, pretending to be outraged Floridians.

"open source code" for the counting machines. What exactly does that mean?

The source for the code is public. The source is the uncompiled version of the code as it is written. This allows modifications to the code by anyone. Why someone would want this for vote tabulating software (other than fraud) is beyond me, unless it is to verify that there isn't a written block like

if candval=1
then votecount=Bush + 1
if candval=2
then votecount=Bush + 1
endif

or whatever

"You liberals should consider yourselves fortunate.

Posted by bobgertz"

Thought you were going back to Powerline, loser.

Thems the facts. I know you rightists disagree--yet you don't agree with any position with those on the left, and we don't agree with you. Bith side think the other is unAmerican. Two countries is the only solution. I think a good civil war would be good too. 100 million dead should be about right. I would anticipate the rightists winning sch a war, only to be killed by the invading armies of Chinese. This country is dead. It died in Florida in 2000. Bury it and get over it.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

* * * *

You're a douchebag.

You're a douchebag.

Yes, but what a melodramatic douchebag:

"Two countries. Only solution"
"country died in 2000"
"bury it".

I still wonder why the only people on the DR who want to tear this country apart are liberal. I've yet to hear one conservative or moderate suggest we split this great country in two or give part of it back to mexico. It's always a liberal. How chicken shit is that?

Goatman-
Let's decide it the same way next time, and in perpetuity...

"unless it is to verify that there isn't a written block..."

Goat, thanks. I think that's the answer.

Crooks and liars. Now there's a credible source, I'm sure. Also, re-read the post. I was referring to the DR as stated in the sentence before the one you quoted.

"Now there's a credible source"

It's a transcript. Did you read that far? The source is the Limbaugh show.

The source is the Limbaugh show.

Now I'm REALLY a disbeliever. A site called crooks and liars that quotes Rush.

Sorry, not my cup of tea. It did not make it past the rig's servers anyway. Must have porn or something on it as well. Does it?

Buffalo Bob, I do agree that we should send you to another country. Hopefully a fowl smelling one where free speach isn't so free. Then you can bitch to yourself silently while sitting in your broken down shit hole of a trailer.

Bee Swell

Goat,

Your net-nanny must be programmed by your Oil Company's PR department. Crooks and Liars is not exactly a friend of your industry.

No porn, just a willingness to expose reight-wing hypocrisiy and outright illegal doings.

Try getting to C&L's website thru a proxy. That's how your counterparts in China get around their censors.

"A site called crooks and liars that quotes Rush"

Seems a natural, doesn't it?

Try getting to C&L's website thru a proxy.

THey've headed off at the pass on that one, too. All proxy sites (like vtunnel) are blocked.

The latter vote clearly seems to imply that if the Gore camp had insisted on day 1 that all FL votes be re-counted the same way, then SCOTUS would have let it proceed. It is, however, a per curium decision, and its application was limited to the circumstances at hand.

Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2008-04-25 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:


Doesn't matter what he insisted upon. Florida law was that an election within a 1% margin was to have a full state-wide recount. This never happened.

Bush may have won, gore may have won...but the state law was never followed and after 30 days of BS, and the SCOTUS stopping the count, the country just kinda moved on in exhaustion and here we are.

They can't be that up-to-date. Google around a bit and you'll find a mirror they haven't shut down yet.

Must suck to be an adult, working on a very secure site where there are only other adults around and having some corporate butt-plug decide what websites you can view.

And people think that the right's pants pissing hasn't affected person freedoms in this country.

Must suck to be an adult, working on a very secure site where there are only other adults around and having some corporate butt-plug decide what websites you can view.

Yes it does. But the pay and bennies are great, 26 weeks off a year, so I can live without my porn and streaming videos while out here. Gotta admit I miss smoking pot at home, though.

And people think that the right's pants pissing hasn't affected person freedoms in this country.

It's a corporate, not political thing. As far as I know, the government does not dictate what a corporation's servers can block or allow.

That one came through, Alex. That leathery old beach bitch made the email rounds a couple of weeks ago.

And people think that the right's pants pissing hasn't affected person freedoms in this country.

PS on server blockage: it's not so much that they don't want us to see certain stuff, it's more that they do not want their very expensive satellite bandwitdh being eaten up with everyone logging onto their favorite porn site or streaming video. So it's a matter of economics, not partisian prurientism

Goat,

How rude of me...if you can't access the site, the least I can do is paste the transcript:

During today's show (4/23) Rush made the statement that he is dreaming/hoping for riots after the Dems convention if they choose Hillary over Obama. He even sang his statment to the "I'm Dreaming of a "WHITE" Christmas" tune.

Lisa: You were saying that you were hoping for a White Christmas if the Democrats choose Hillary over Obama and you even kind of sang your statement to the tune of White Christmas or did you mean a white country? What exactly did you mean by that statement yesterday?

Rush: Ho ho ho.

Lisa: Because I feel like all Americans, the American people want is what's best for this country.

Rush: No, they don't.

Lisa: Why does this have to be a hate-filled comment from you and other radio hosts?

Rush: Lisa, there's nothing but love for people, care and concern for people.

Lisa: It didn't sound that way yesterday.

Rush: Well, you're picking a selective moment. How often do you listen to the show?

Lisa: I listen almost every day.

Rush: You do?

Lisa: Yes I do. So I was a bit surprised should I say shocked that you were so blatant with that comment.

Rush: I've made the comment before.

Lisa: Who wishes for riots, who wants that to happen in this country?

Rush: Who wishes for riots? I didn't get the ball rolling, it is Democrats like Al Sharpton that there will be ... .

Lisa: Rush.

Rush: You need to be calling Rev. Sharpton ...

Lisa: I'm calling the gentlemen who made the comment yesterday and sang to the tune of I'm Dreaming of a White Christmas. What, what was that about?

Rush: It was about nothing. You are, you are taking ...

Lisa: You are an intelligent man and I don't think anything you do is about nothing ...

Rush: Lisa.

Lisa: Everything you say and do on your radio show has a purpose. I've been listening long enough to pick up on that, Rush.

Rush: What's happening here is that your own racism and your own projection of racism is forcing you..

Lisa: I have never wished for riots in my country.

Rush: You are reading my mind. Between the two of us, you are the racist

Lisa: I'm tired of gas prices, I'm tired of truck drivers not being able to get to deliver goods. I'm tired of people getting kicked out of their homes. I'm tired. I just want what's best for this country for everybodywhite--blackChinese--
and I NEVER wished for riots.

Rush: I see Americans, you see colors and races ...

Lisa: I didn't say White Christmas or white country, which one?

Lisa: I wish you would take your comments back and just really start from scratch. Republicans, Democrats, we need to do away with both parties and what think what's best for this country and all that would do is put Rush out of business with his hate filled discussions every day ...

Rush: We need to put liberals out of business, Lisa. We need to put mush minds out of business like you.

Lisa: Why am I a mush mind? Why are you resorting to name calling, sir?

At that point, Rush, ended the call.

Thanks for the C&P. Sounds typical Rush. I've never liked they guy. Though his politics are too extreme for me, his arrogance is even worse.

Goat,

My pleasure...just returning the favor.

Safe travels.

I listened to that interaction by Rush and Lisa and it was nice to hear someone with a bit of class make Rush look foolish. His dittohead army should look at this country right now and ask themselves if we got where we are because of "liberal mush heads" or right wing leadership. I think if they are honest with themselves the right wing has to receive the blame. I have to wonder how low the value of their home needs to fall before the realize they have been lied to by people who got rich doing it.

Goatman,

The basic problem of vote fraud is prevalent and a crime. If it isn't stopped then Democracy is a fraud. Recent problems take place within a duopoly that avoids policy debate like the plague. Whether Gore lives or dies has nothing to do with the problem. Both sides have cheated, but two wrongs do not make a right. The criminals should be jailed, but only one Republican has been held to account. Gerrymandering distorts election results more than any other effect.

It is absurd that we lecture and threaten other Governments about respecting one man one vote without enforcing it on ourselves. Hi-Tech voting machines which are turned on once every year or two are equally absurd. Optical scanners, used for educational testing and voting machines are the best solution. But pencil and paper is batter than where things are going.

There is nothing special about recounts, they happen every close election for hundreds of years. What was special about Florida was how Baker and planeloads of Republican shills obstructed the recount.

One of the Florida Newspapers, Pallast, Brad and others have all reached the same conclusion. A COMPLETE recount gave Florida to Gore. Gore's proposed partial recount coupled with Jeb and Kathleen's interference with the principal of one vote for each citizen gave Florida to Shrub, making the Bush Crime Family and all their cronies richer than ever, destroying the economy in the process.

They are above the law and don't give a fuck. For icing on the cake Jeb pocketed millions after leaving office by saddling the Florida State Pension Fund with subprime loans (for a hefty legal fee). Neil of course was given a pass by his Daddy for his participation in crimes at Silverado Savings and Loan.

Monday (Saturday) morning quarterbacks. It's done. If it's ever that close and that goofy again, you'll see this again and maybe this time a Dem will take it. Get over it.

Neil of course was given a pass by his Daddy for his participation in crimes at Silverado Savings and Loan.
Posted by nutcase


What do you mean?

"What do you mean?"

He's a free man to this day.

Mr Fair

You seem to miss the point. The point isn't about the election of 2000. The point is about elections that can be trusted.

The people have accepted the 2000 election and gotten over it long long ago. The problem is that America isn't over the 2000 election, and it will probably take at least a century to cure the problems it cost--mostly from the USSC appointments made by Bush.

Mr Fair,

The S&L disaster was openly criminal. First the Industry was deregulated. This permitted S&L Bank Officers to make loans to themselves. Mafia figures held secret ownerships in S&Ls, much like Casinos.

S&L Officers made loans to themselves based on usually fruadulent appraisals. Most, if not all, never made a single payment, so the S&L's collapsed and tacxpayers were handed the bill. The major criminals all walked scott free because BushI fired 50 prosecutors preparing for battle after he won the election. This relieved his son Neil who had signed off on fraudulent loans in exchange for a free house in Denver. BushI covered up the scandal during the election campaign, which increased the cost to taxpayers by at least $200 billion. All the criminals walked with the money, except Charles Keating, who only served two years. McCain took bribes from Keating.

Corruption is the rule in Washington. Nader, Paul and Kucinich are exceptions. While it is not clear that Obama would be better than the rest, it is crystal clear that McCain and Hillary have been corrupted and thus are incapable of ever representing the country's best interests.

"Buffalo Bob, I do agree that we should send you to another country. Hopefully a fowl smelling one where free speach isn't so free. Then you can bitch to yourself silently while sitting in your broken down shit hole of a trailer.

Bee Swell

Posted by Crackpipejunkie "


I vote we send him to live with whomever is stoking up that smokestack on the Moon.

Crackpipe-
re: This is for all you liberal fucktards who can't seem to grasp the truth about the 2000 election which Bush Won.

www.cnn.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- "A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.


That's the way to do it! Have the Supreme Court declare the winner, and then convince yourself that it would have turned out that way if the votes were counted.

The only problem with this way of doing things is that we still have a Constitution (kinda), and we don't grow enough bananas...

Stolen elections via Premier/Diebold is normal these days:>)

Posted by Bani

Never happened in Chicago when they used paper. Pull your head out and realize that election frad is older than elections. It wasn't invented by the republicans in 2000.

Posted by Sniper

so it's okay then?:>)