Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Republican Norm Coleman's dim prospects for winning the U.S. Senate trial darkened today as several hundred disputed absentee ballots were finally counted and split strongly for his DFL opponent, Al Franken.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Zap

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

:+)

Coleman should stop wasting tax payer dollars and just concede.

The party of no is gonna drag this out as long as possible.

What a bunch of hypocritical fucktards they are.

The party of no is gonna drag this out as long as possible.

What a bunch of hypocritical fucktards they are.

And we all know for a fact that if the situation was reversed that Franken would quietly acquiesce and bow out -- right 726?

Please, I want to hear you say that. You won't? Want to rethink that "hypocritical fucktards" thing then? LOL

This is all going to come down to Pawlenty. I very seriously doubt SCOTUS will hear this one.

The Republicans can't even beat a mediocre comedian.

That's the funniest thing Franken has ever been a part of!

"I very seriously doubt SCOTUS will hear this one."

What makes you say that? If there has been a misapplication of Minnesota's election laws, I'd hope they would hear it.

Is this the daily Franken post?

If there has been a misapplication of Minnesota's election laws

Sure. So which laws were misapplied Joe?

I am just wonderig whether Pawlenty wants to run for president in 2012 or not. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

What makes you say that?

Let's see what the MN SC has to say before we jump to SCOTUS. My feeling is that the SCOTUS will leave this with the state and not interfere, unless, of course the MN SC is way off base - just my feeling.

This is offically beyond silly. The people of Minnesota have only half a voice right now in the Senate and there are important things being voted on right now.

Put the bottle down for a second Joe.

I realize that you said IF and therefore included it in my post.

And I agree with you. IF.........

But cases don't go to the SC to determine IF there is a case or not.

"there are important things being voted on right now." - Kanei

No one is reading what they are voting on, so how important can it be ;-)

As a Republican I say, the Republican party should just lay down over this issue, Coleman the incumbent lost, also when the ship has run aground, the Democrats won't have anyone to blame, not enough votes being thier one of thier favorite excuses.

But then again ManyPaths says whatever I am for is wrong so I am not sure what to think.

Coleman should stop wasting tax payer dollars and just concede.

No kidding. Al Gore was slammed for fighting a recount battle for a month, and the presidency was at stake. Coleman's been fighting this for five months -- even after telling Franken he should concede the day after election day.

Coleman should stop wasting tax payer dollars and just concede.

#2 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2009-04-07 07:54 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

and of course this statement would not even be thought of if the shoe was on that other foot
as I understand it the problem is that in a couple of districts democrat run I might add they threw out thousands of votes for one reason and it was done differently than other places.
IF THATS true, are all of you libs telling me that doesnt matter because that sure looks like a departure from what you have been spewing since 2000

The party of no is gonna drag this out as long as possible.

What a bunch of hypocritical fucktards they are.

#3 | Posted by 726 at 2009-04-08 07:58 AM | Reply

hypocritical fucktards
well lets try and ignore this LIBERAL SIGNATURE comment and get to the other

party of No???

every sunday the houston chronicle puts out our area congressional voting record and snapshots of the bills they voted on
and ON EACH AND EVERY BIG issue ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS VOTE YES..
and YEs the republicans always voted no but are the dems supposed to vote yes on everything too.

so you put down republicans for voting no...and see no problem with dems ALWAYS VOTING yes....regardless of what damage is being done with those yes votes....and there was even a thread here once I believe that talked about dems not blindly following obama...bullshit........

ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS VOTE YES..

let me put that a better way

they ALWAYS VOTE FOR OBAMA.....sometimes the way they KISSED HIS ASS was to vote no.

This might be one of the reasons that Americans perception of Republicans is at an all-time low.

But Bush Lover has a PLAN so everything is going to be GOP-OK.

Right Bush Lover?

Sure. So which laws were misapplied Joe?
.......#9 | Posted by Manypaths

....the one where the Republican didn't win......

Fight on Coleman. What we don't need is another CLOWN in congress.

"and see no problem with dems ALWAYS VOTING yes...."

.....why wouldn't they.?.....it's their platform...their budget....

"...and there was even a thread here once I believe that talked about dems not blindly following obama...bullshit........
......#18 | Posted by afkabl2 "

.......they are following with their eyes wide open....Obama is going where the majority of America wants him to go......

But Bush Lover has a PLAN so everything is going to be GOP-OK.

Right Bush Lover?

#20 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009

thats right baby...

and the phrase is

dont tread on me

.......they are following with their eyes wide open....Obama is going where the majority of America wants him to go......

#23 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-

well on M savage last night he said something I agree with

if the election were to be again this tuesday mccain would win and I believe that because there were so many people who voted for obama because he wasnt bush or a republican and at that time he was actually thought to be more to the center

well we know now thats bullshit as the policies of ayers and kalid and emanual comes out with the social engineering of J wright is exposed.
YOU REMEMBER THOSE PEOPLE dont you
those are CLOSE Associates we were BANNED FROM EVEN TALKING ABOUT.

"I am just wonderig whether Pawlenty wants to run for president in 2012 or not. I guess we'll find out soon enough."

Well, if he refuses to sign off then he sides with the right wing but even if nominated would be guaranteed to lose the election

or

if he signs off he pisses off the right wing but moderates will consider him more reasonable

so

as I see it, he's screwed whichever way he decides.

""I very seriously doubt SCOTUS will hear this one."

What makes you say that? If there has been a misapplication of Minnesota's election laws, I'd hope they would hear it.

#7 | Posted by JOE at 2009-04-08 10:47 AM"

Because they are very, very reluctant to get involved in state election laws. Most lawyers would know that.

Fuck, most people who read the newspaper would know that.

"And we all know for a fact that if the situation was reversed that Franken would quietly acquiesce and bow out -- right 726?

Please, I want to hear you say that. You won't? Want to rethink that "hypocritical fucktards" thing then? LOL

#4 | Posted by goatman at 2009-04-08 08:16 AM"

Well, we have the lesson of Gore, right Goatboy? He conceded for the good of the Nation, didn't he? Hypocritical fucktards is right.

Hell, by the time they get this thing settled it will be time for another election.

but didnt it go to the supreme court?

so isnt that as high as it can go?/

hey montecore...by the way...the other day at aqueduct there was a horse named montecore but I didnt bet on him

and of course he won..maybe next time.....

Hell, by the time they get this thing settled it will be time for another election.

#30 | Posted by jerrytarkanian at

well we can always hope.....lol

but again...as coleman has said on every interview and even the democrat secty of state has said...
this is his right to do so and if anyone here thinks that franken wouldnt be doing the exact same thing

well there is that land in the everglades that is still for sale....

Theoreticllay, it could go to the US Supreme Court, BLT, but it is very unlikely they'll hear the case.

I can't believe you didn't bet on mOntecOre. What were the odds?

Please, I want to hear you say that. You won't? Want to rethink that "hypocritical fucktards" thing then? LOL

#4 | Posted by goatman

I have no problem saying that.

And no, I am not rethinking my opinion of the party of "up and down votes".

Maybe you should. LOL! LOL!

the election were to be again this tuesday mccain would win
#25 | Posted by afkabl2

.......first......Obama has over 60% approval rating, so McCain would not win........

......second........the election was last November......

Hell, by the time they get this thing settled it will be time for another election.

#30 | Posted by jerrytarkanian

That is what the party of no is trying for.

They want to deny the people of minnesota representation for as long as possible. Nothing more.

They are spoiled four year olds screaming and bitching at the top of their lungs.

as coleman has said
this is his right to do
..........#32 | Posted by afkabl2

......let's hope Coleman maintains the same stoicism if he's convicted of his corruption charges and is sent to jail........

........"this is the right thing to do".......(shuffling-off in his manacles & handcuffs).....

I can't believe you didn't bet on mOntecOre. What were the odds?
#33 | Posted by mOntecOre

He was just being sociable, as the CTV reveals: www.youtube.com

Theoreticllay, it could go to the US Supreme Court, BLT, but it is very unlikely they'll hear the case.

I can't believe you didn't bet on mOntecOre. What were the odds?

#33 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009

thats what I heard as well but I was talking about the bush v gore case where someone said that gore so graciously bowed out..
how can you bow out of a case that you send all the way to the SC

and his odds were lower than my betting odds.

but I still could have had him in the exotics..

the election were to be again this tuesday mccain would win
#25 | Posted by afkabl2

.......first......Obama has over 60% approval rating, so McCain would not win........

......second........the election was last November......

#35 | Posted by skizziks at 2009

it WAS last november....well duh...lol
I guess some things you just try and forget.

He was just being sociable, as the CTV reveals: www.youtube.com

#38 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-04-08 12:29 PM

that was a good movie

and TILLY....holy shit...what a great set of mammaries

have to go over to the sex spray thread for a moment

"Fuck, most people who read the newspaper would know that."

Yeah, the newspaper has articles all the time about the Supreme Court denying cert. on questions of local election laws. Silly me, should've read the paper. What a fucking joke you are.

I guess some things you just try and forget.
........#40 | Posted by afkabl2

......it's ok to admire McCain........

......but you can do it without imitating his ADD...

look I admit it. I voted for mccain for two reasons
when he said that he would lose the election before he changed his...CORRECT>..view on iraq
and he wasnt a liberal fascists like the one we have now.,,.,and if you say it was an anti obama vote and not a pro mccain vote, I can live with that..

BUT....as I understand it...
the whole problem is that heavy dem districts threw out thousands of ballots for ONE particular reason and the heavily dem district DID NOT...or it might be the other way around

so I wonder why dems are now so opposed to FREE AND EQUAL ELECTIONS IN this country

and why in the HELL isnt there more of a 'standard' that they all have to use?

just another republican ass clown attempting to force his will on the people

that heavy dem districts threw out thousands of ballots for ONE particular reason and the heavily dem district DID NOT...or it might be the other

obviously one of these should be REPUBS and not dems

so I wonder why dems are now so opposed to FREE AND EQUAL ELECTIONS IN this country

Bush taught us cheating works better?

just another republican ass clown attempting to force his will on the people

#45 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk

this is so fuckin funny to read this at the same time the democrat white house and congress are getting so far into debt and we HAVE NO SaY AT ALL about it............
makes the admittedlyt out of control bush spending look like silas marner.

Bush taught us cheating works better?

#47 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-04-08 12:40 PM |

well gee...the supreme court of the united states disagrees with you.

AND SURPRISE....so do I....yuk yuk

well on M savage last night he said something I agree with

aflac agrees with Mikey Wiener.

Now that's news....

Not.

I find it amazing how many people who I don't think live in MN who are actually worked up over something that means nothing to them and that they can't do a God Damn thing about.

Amazing? OK, I find it funny as fuck.

Bacon, Lettuce and Tomato: Are you having fun?

"Fight on Coleman. What we don't need is another CLOWN in congress."

So - you think that a helmet-haired grinch in headlong flight from reality isn't a clown?

Between Afkabibble and Goatass, this thread reminds me of a nut house.

Between Afkabibble and Goatass, this thread reminds me of a nut house.

#54 | Posted by briwo at 2009-04-08 01:11

well remember that you dont have to comment.
you can just stay the hell away.

and as I scroll its pretty typical that I see little if any real discourse on any points that either goat or I have made and that alone is commentary enough.

"Yeah, the newspaper has articles all the time about the Supreme Court denying cert. on questions of local election laws. Silly me, should've read the paper. What a fucking joke you are.

#42 | Posted by JOE at 2009-04-08 12:33 PM"

Not all the time, weenie wacker. Just often enough to where people who read the newspaper would know that. But since you spend every fucking day here getting in bitter arguments with other people, you wouldn't have any idea. Do you even know what a newspaper looks like, ballbag?

and why in the HELL isnt there more of a 'standard' that they all have to use?

#44 | Posted by afkabl2

....I actually agree with you on this point.....

...but the rules leave it to individual states to organize the vote....which gets mixed results.....

.....there should be an independent national Returning Officer to organize and handle all elections..........

Anyone else getting the feeling you are in the middle of canceled soap opera?

this is so fuckin funny to read this at the same time the democrat white house and congress are getting so far into debt and we HAVE NO SaY AT ALL about it............
makes the admittedlyt out of control bush spending look like silas marner.

.......#48 | Posted by afkabl2

......the out of control Bush spending was made even worse by the incompetence of his administration.......

.......he left a giant mess and now somebody has to clean it up.......

.......relax and give Obama some time.......

No, Munty, I don't know what a newspaper looks like. Is it like the news, but on paper? Is it all folded up? Tell me more about this "news paper" you speak of. Fascinating.

It's the material that your mom lines the bottom of your cage with, Lil' Joe.

hehe

Between Afkabibble and Goatass, this thread reminds me of a nut house.

#54 | Posted by briwo at 2009-04-08 01:11 PM |

???

WTF are you talking about? I made one post -- a valid one at that. Why didn't you address it instead of making a snide remark?

Troll somewhere else, briwo.

there should be an independent national Returning Officer to organize and handle all elections..........

#57 | Posted by skizziks at 2009

nah...must be left up to the states because its not applied specifically to the feds...right

maybe each state should set the laws and actually MAKE EVERYONE FOLLOW THEM....or is that too easy?

the out of control Bush spending was made even worse by the incompetence of his administration.......

.......he left a giant mess and now somebody has to clean it up.......

.......relax and give Obama some time.......

#59 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-04-08

anytime I am watching tv and someone even hints at the BLAME BUSH line, my remote goes 'click'

and please look at the middle BOTTOM list of threads and see where the cbo or the other says that gaithner and obama have underestimated the deficit and debt that they keep harping on

and maybe just once someone will actually mention my admission of bush...I said it this way on purpose..
the admittedly out of controll spending makes obama look like silas marner

AN admission using a literary reference

NICE....

Funny when the right touts the judgement of the CBO now when they ignored it under Bush. Funny how the left ignores the judgement of the CBO when they touted it under Bush. Shoe, meet other foot.

WTF are you talking about? I made one post -- a valid one at that. Why didn't you address it instead of making a snide remark?

Troll somewhere else, briwo.

#63 | Posted by goatman at

you have to cut him some slack
the drudge retort is a REAL DEBATE CHALLENGED site as prescribed by the bloggers of america..???????? LOL

and that means that libs here can just make these commments and then leave...

Funny when the right touts the judgement of the CBO now when they ignored it under Bush. Funny how the left ignores the judgement of the CBO when they touted it under Bush. Shoe, meet other foot.

#66 | Posted by kanrei at

well kanrei

I guess this just means that they really are as advertized...a nonpartisan place.

anytime I am watching tv and someone even hints at the BLAME BUSH line, my remote goes 'click'

65 | Posted by afkabl2

That would explain your ignorance.

No wonder you're a dumbfuck.

Well, we have the lesson of Gore, right Goatboy?

I didn't know gore was in the Minnesota race. My post addressed the Minnesota race, montecore.

I may be your fat fantasy boy, but you seem to have a hard time comprehending a retort.

anytime I am watching tv and someone even hints at the BLAME BUSH line, my remote goes 'click'

...#65 | Posted by afkabl2

.....it's not a question of blame.....it's a question of Responsibility......

......Bush produced the mess......Bush is responsible for the mess......Obama has inherited the mess......

.....Bush took 8 years to produce this nightmare...

.....it's not going to get fixed in 8 weeks......pls be real......

Then you are a fucking idiot, Goatboy. But that's not news to anyone around here.

Troll somewhere else, briwo.

#63 | Posted by goatman at 2009-04-08 01:38 PM | FLAG: Hypocrit

I may be your fat fantasy boy,...

And GoatWoman's too.

lol

#73 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-04-08 01:49 PM | Reply | Flag: Working on his fat boy fantasy for the nightly jerk-off

That would explain your ignorance.

No wonder you're a dumbfuck.

#69 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009

wow all I have to do is post one thing about libs being dickheads and then
VOILLA....the proof comes right in...

bite me ,dick.

maybe each state should set the laws and actually MAKE EVERYONE FOLLOW THEM....or is that too easy?

........#64 | Posted by afkabl2

......some state governments are more corrupt than others.......

.....it leads to the kind of cheating and attempted cheating that is going on right now.......with chads, computers that "change" your vote, computers with no paper trail......the kind of farce going on in Minnesota......the kind of farce that went on in Florida.......

it's not going to get fixed in 8 weeks......pls be real......

#71 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-04-08

but look..that would seem logical if it werent that obama has done things in unprecedented speed because of pelosi and reid HIJACKING congress so you see, this REPUBLIC cant afford to wait.

.....it leads to the kind of cheating and attempted cheating that is going on right now.......with chads, computers that "change" your vote, computers with no paper trail......the kind of farce going on in Minnesota......the kind of farce that went on in Florida.......

#77 | Posted by skizziks at

yes but even in the face of the DEMS IN MINN STEALING THIS ELECTION....I still back the states rights of deciding how their people are elected.

Wonder if Coleman can drag it out till end of the term with appeals?

Just seat the guy already. Even wingnuts should acknowledge that the damage being done by delaying and denying Franken the seat at this point outweighs the damage which might be theoretically by giving him the seat. This should not a precedent the GOP wants any part of.

NO NO lets strech it out 2 years until the NEXT election!

I believe that state law prohibits it and of course there is the usual...if coleman were leading, your tune would be completely different.

and here is a link that shows that more of this might be in our future
and of course when you see who wrote the article I am sure you will discount or not even read it
BUT I linked here just in case.

and my answer to the question..
your damn right the election is being rigged.
remember that RHOM the chicago politician has his hands all over this

www.nypost.com

and please notice the one line

AN ILLEGAL FRIENDLY ELECTION..
the HALLMARK OF DEMOCRATS involved in elections.

AFK,
You ok? You are making Jeffin seem rational and Bob seem open to other's ideas today.

yes but even in the face of the DEMS IN MINN STEALING THIS ELECTION....I still back the states rights of deciding how their people are elected.

#79 | Posted by afkabl2

......they are winning fair and square.......

......Coleman's people have scrutinized every ballot ......but aside from this race......

......I still think we could use a federal office that would decide voter districts independently (to stop the abuse of redistricting to rig elections) and to convene uniform national standards for elections...

Coleman cannot win. But this fight cripples the Democrat's majority in the Senate for who knows how long. That is the point. Rethuglicans are perfectly willing to destroy Democracy in order to gain power or money. Clinton understands this better than anyone.

Rethuglicans are perfectly willing to destroy Democracy in order to gain power or money.

Like threatening fillabusters when they so opposed them just two short years ago?

There have only been six elections in the history of the United States where exit polls disagreed with official election results. All six provided a Rethuglican victory under a Rethuglican Secretary of State and five of them got Shrub into office.

Exit polls are so reliable they are used by the US to monitor election results throughout the third world. They only don't count when a Rethuglican victory is at stake.

They only don't count when a Rethuglican victory is at stake.

That would be unfair!

Like threatening fillabusters when they so opposed them just two short years ago?

Precisely. The gang-of-14 was a rare example of responsible bi-partisanship. It was cetainly one of McCain's better moments.

#89 | Posted by nutcase

In 2004, the polling was structured whereby 57% of those surveyed were women. Also, much of the exit polling was considerably different than the polling that was conducted 1 day prior to the election. Slightly off topic: the exit polls in Venezuala were WAY more skewed, yet Jimmy Carter saw fit to certify their election in favor of Chavez. Also, don't insinuate that the Dems are innocent players incapable of shenanigans. The Illinois tally in the 1960 elections should be proof enough to the contrary.

Election shenanigans have plagued our country since its inception and, realistically, always will. The GOP is certainly guilty of criminality in this regard, BUT so is the DNC.

lol...this is all some Liberal Plot
to reinvent government, take over the legal
system, seize the guns, batten down the
hatches, and seize all the good looking
white women with independant minds I tells
yah!!

lol...Wait a Sec....I'm a Liberal White
Male (I know, I know---endangered specie)
and no one told ME about this plan...

wtf zup wit dat! (for all my homies out there)...

lol. Congrats Franken!! wtsockittotheman...

(ahem...that was good natured frivolity people!!)

There have only been six elections in the history of the United States where exit polls disagreed with official election results. All six provided a Rethuglican victory under a Rethuglican Secretary of State and five of them got Shrub into office.
Exit polls are so reliable they are used by the US to monitor election results throughout the third world. They only don't count when a Rethuglican victory is at stake.

#89 | POSTED BY NUTCASE AT 2009-04-08 02:58 PM | REPLY | FLAG Dipshit

STFU. Bush won popular vote last time around you whiny little bitch - California notwithstanding.

Can't you just be happy your party now has all the power, and is fucking everything up - power-grab style. Once the clusterfuck is over, you'll only have yourselves to blame.

sorry SOMOCO...usually I don't chime in on blatantly witless raves...you obviously don't know your history or the movers and the shakers behind the current economic meltdown.

1st of all, Obama inherited this mess from G.W.
let's not forget that. So if you want to be shrill and blame Obama for this mess, go ahead, but no one but you and Rush Limbaugh are listening...

Reagan started this fiasco when he appointed Greenspan (a supply sider and deregulator) and got
rid of Volcker (who believed in regulation).

Enter Trickle Down (actually Race Upwards) Economics...Enter H.W. Bush calling Reagan's Economic plan (famously) "Voodoo Economics" at a debate between the two...

All this stems back to Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics and his theories. You see they thought that you could deregulate the system and that people would take a bit more profit, but essentially remain honest....they forgot about Human Greed...and that people will tend towards dishonesty when they smell a large pile of money...

Want some real answers...Read Stiglitz's article "Capitalist Fools" in Vanity Fair...

Go ahead...Google it...He pretty much lays it all out, how it all transpired. And the people behind it? The Republican Supply Side Economists, i.e. (Voodoo Economics)....well sir, we are reaping the benefits now...

But go ahead and educate yourself. First though, shut of O'Liely and Flush...you will only find propaganda there...

As a big fan of political entertainment, I am honestly looking forward to the day that Al Franken is victorious.
There will be cameras in his face for a full week and all of America will be introduced to the proud and articulate statesman, Senator Al Franken (D).
He'll be on the View, Olbermann, Letterman and John Stewart within the week.
After the blogs get rolling on his national debut, the MSM will redirect our collective attention by chasing the Palin's around with a camera again in an effort to fabricate a contrast and change the subject.
DR, Huffington and other leftwing safe-houses will go full throttle with Rush Limbaugh, Michael Steele and Bobby Jindal jokes to try to save face.
I might be wrong but, I'm feeling pretty good about this prediction.

Coleman cannot win. But this fight cripples the Democrat's majority in the Senate for who knows how long. That is the point.

~Nutcase

THIS.

Be Well.

Dethspud I believe the GOP is financing this for that sole reason. You can bet Coleman will receive a nice kickback for doing this.

Dethspud I believe the GOP is financing this for that sole reason.

Spud feels same same.

You can bet Coleman will receive a nice kickback for doing this.

Hells yeah.

With the GOP no good deed goes unpunished and no dick move goes unrewarded.

It is their way.

Be Well.

"The Illinois tally in the 1960 elections should be proof enough to the contrary."

Urban legend.

The fraud of the 1960 election is far from an urban legend, Danni. You shouldn't allow your blind partisianship cloud the truth.

The efforts of Daley and the powerful Chicago Democratic organization gave Kennedy an extraordinary Cook County victory margin of 450,000 votesmore than 10% of Chicago's 1960 population
...
Mazo, the Herald-Tribune reporter, later said that he found names of the dead who had voted in Chicago, along with 56 people from one house.

en.wikipedia.org

Texas and Illinois, the two largest states under dispute, witnessed the nastiest fights. In Texas, where Kennedy won the 24 electoral votes by a margin of 46,000 ballots, the GOP took to the courts. But its suits were thrown out by a federal judge who claimed he had no jurisdiction. In Illinois, the appeal was pursued more vigorously, maybe because the electoral take was higher (27) and Kennedy's margin slimmer (9,000 votes). Charges focused on Cook County (specifically Chicago) where Kennedy had won by a suspiciously overwhelming 450,000 votes.

National GOP officials plunged in. Thruston Morton flew to Chicago to confer with Illinois Republican leaders on strategy, while party Treasurer Meade Alcorn announced Nixon would win the state. With Nixon distancing himself from the effort, the Cook County state's attorney, Benjamin Adamowski, stepped forward to lead the challenge. A Daley antagonist and potential rival for the mayoralty, Adamowski had lost his job to a Democrat by 25,000 votes. The closeness of his defeat entitled him to a recount, which began Nov. 29.

Completed Dec. 9, the recount of 863 precincts showed that the original tally had undercounted Nixon's (and Adamowski's) votes, but only by 943, far from the 4,500 needed to alter the results. In fact, in 40 percent of the rechecked precincts, Nixon's vote was overcounted. Displeased, the Republicans took the case to federal court, only to have a judge dismiss the suits. Still undeterred, they turned to the State Board of Elections, which was composed of four Republicans, including the governor, and one Democrat. Yet the state board, too, unanimously rejected the petition, citing the GOP's failure to provide even a single affidavit on its behalf. The national party finally backed off after Dec. 19, when the nation's Electoral College certified Kennedy as the new presidentbut even then local Republicans wouldn't accept the Illinois results. www.slate.com

BTW - the entire article is interesting and worth a read. I learned some things I hadn't known before.

Mazo, the Herald-Tribune reporter, later said that he found names of the dead who had voted in Chicago, along with 56 people from one house.

#99 | Posted by goatman

Also, Alex Mazo was a friend and biographer of Nixon.

*Earl* Mazo

Also, Alex Mazo was a friend and biographer of Nixon.

So? Does that make the fraudulent votes he uncovered valid? Sure, his investigation may have been more dogged to expose democrat malfeasance, but if he found undisputed fraud, it doesn't matter who his friends are.

Despite demonstrating net errors favoring both Nixon and Adamowski (some precincts40% in Nixon's caseshowed errors favoring them, a factor suggesting error, rather than fraud), the totals found fell short of reversing the results for either candidate.

From that same Wiki entry, Goatman

Interesting how we use Wiki when it suits us but denigrate it as a source when it doesn't suit us.

Interesting how we use Wiki when it suits us but denigrate it as a source when it doesn't suit s.

Who said it didn't suit me? And exactly where did I denigrate it?

Why do you have to put words in my mouth, ted? Is your desire to discredit me so strong that you have to lie about me?

So? Does that make the fraudulent votes he uncovered valid? Sure, his investigation may have been more dogged to expose democrat malfeasance, but if he found undisputed fraud, it doesn't matter who his friends are.

#104 | Posted by goatman

It certainly makes his motivation more suspect. Combine that with "the GOP's failure to provide even a single affidavit on its behalf" and it raises even more credibility issues for the fraud claims.

Not saying there weren't shenanigans - it IS Illinois, after all. However, the whole "stolen" election thing may not be quite as clear cut as some folks, and some Wiki entries might have us believe.

It certainly makes his motivation more suspect.

And I admitted that. Nonetheless, a fraudelent vote is a fraudelent vote, no matter how or by whom it is uncovered.

I'm sure there were left biased folks who uncovered the fraud in Texas. I don't care what persuasion they were if the fraud is validated.

A little sensitive?

Wiki is simply one of those sources that seems a little suspect as a source given the way it's set up.

If you want to think of that as a lie, go right ahead.

The words "desire" and "strong" and "you" and "me" all together is one sentence make me a little queasy.

"but if he found undisputed fraud, it doesn't matter who his friends are."

Undisputed? Where does it say that? He CLAIMED he had uncovered fraud.

If it was "undisputed" or provable, why couldn't/didn't the GOP provide even one affidavit of said fraud to the Election Board?

What I'm saying is that it isn't quite so black and white as some would have us believe it was.

"It certainly makes his motivation more suspect."

And I admitted that.

#108 | Posted by goatman

No you didn't. You said his friendship with Nixon might have made him more determined to uncover fraud. The point is, it might just as easily have motivated him to claim fraud based on little or no REAL evidence.

The point is, it might just as easily have motivated him to claim fraud based on little or no REAL evidence.

Yeah, you're right. His motivation proves the votes were indeed valid. *sigh*

Yeah, you're right. His motivation proves the votes were indeed valid. *sigh*

#112 | Posted by goatman

Ahhh, once again you jump right over what I actually said in order to assign a position that I never took. Isn't that conveeeeeenient?

You are probably one of the most self-unaware posters on the DR.

In Chicago, where Kennedy won by more than 450,000 votes, local reporters uncovered so many stories of electoral shenanigans--including voting by the dead--that the Chicago Tribune concluded that "the election of November 8 was characterized by such gross and palpable fraud as to justify the conclusion that [Nixon] was deprived of victory."

www.washingtonpost.com

I wonder which of Nixon's dastardly friends were behind this fact (which as to today is still reasonably undisputed) which was originally reported by the Chicago Tribune itself?

#114 | Posted by goatman

"Stories".

Yet not a single affidavit submitted to the Election Board.

But all that is beside the point since you are arguing against a position that I never took.

Your game-playing seems to work with the BB's and the Jeffn's, but I think I'll take a pass.

You are probably one of the most self-unaware posters on the DR

So we (well, you, actually) have devolved to the name calling and/or innuendo phase of the debate.

Cool

Just an observation/opinion. Crying "name calling" is just another of your little tactics.

Yet not a single affidavit submitted to the Election Board.

Because Nixon "gracefully conceded" rather than throw the country into a turmoil as cited in the Washington Post story I linked to.

If you have a link that disputes the Chicago count, I would love to see it and read it. BTW, conspiracy.com or leftleaningblog.com doesn't count. A reputable source such as a well known newspape or news organization will suffice.

If you can't do that, more name calling or innuendo from you will have to do

Goatman twists the limpwrists in to knots.

Because Nixon "gracefully conceded" rather than throw the country into a turmoil as cited in the Washington Post story I linked to.

#118 | Posted by goatman

Not as gracefully as some might have us believe, according to the Slate article. At least, not until Eisenhower withdrew his support.

But keep twisting my words and getting all self-righteous. Stick with a proven method but I'm done with your game for today.

Just an observation/opinion. Crying "name calling" is just another of your little tactics.

I've been in enough competitive debates to know that these 'observations' as you call them would be detrimental to your team. Opinions are definitely not accepted.

Put a sweet name on it, it's still name calling

Anyway, any reasonable person knows that the fraud in the 1960 election in Chicago was one of the worst -- if not the worst -- in American history. Too bad it wasn't Nixon's fraud, because you would gleefully acknowledge the fact. Such is blind partisianship.

Not much else to say on this one.

Goatman twists the limpwrists in to knots.
#119 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-04-09 09:11 AM | Reply | Flag: Help! I'm Knotted and I Can't Get Loose!

Poor Starvis. Keep trying Sally, some day you'll type something funny.

#123 FF - sounds like that one doctor from Scrubs.

SanAntonioRogue point(s), especially his post #100, directly address the implied accusations that somehow Sen. Kennedy 'snuck one by' in Illinois. It's likely that the "official tally" in Illinois is not precisely accurate (as if the tallies in ANY state in ANY election are or can be!).

FWIW, it useful to note that even if Illinois had gone for Mr. Nixon, the outcome of the election would NOT have changed. Of course the Electoral College tally would have more closely matched the extremely close popular vote tally (it would have been Nixon: 246; Kennedy: 276 instead of Nixon: 219; Kennedy 303), but Sen. Kennedy still would have won.

If one wants to argue that the tallies in the 1960 could/should have been better and/or more accurate, then do so. However, I'm not sure who one would argue with since few (if ANY!) would deny that. OTOH if one wants to argue that Mr. Nixon actually won the 1960 election, then do that (but you'd better present more compelling evidence than what has been presented here so far).

modern-us-
history.suite101.com

Rethuglicans are perfectly willing to destroy Democracy in order to gain power or money.

Like threatening fillabusters when they so opposed them just two short years ago?

#87 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-04-08 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

my comment is on the first statement
I guess whoever wrote it has been in a coma since last jan 20 and has not seen the democrat congress completely dismantle the constituiton of the united states.
where once people demanded a trial because someone said the president at that time called it a god damned piece of paper..now dems are waisting no time rendering it useless.

and just as people in that time, when king george and parliment decided to throw out any rights the colonies wanted and all of that...and even though they could have reconciled the dispute and saved the colonies for some years to come, they didnt and the result just might be similar

dont tread on me.

Norm Coleman looks like he's ready for a casket.

Death warmed over.

dont tread on me.

#126 | Posted by afkabl2

You're still nothing but a dim imitation of real patriots who coined that slogan.

But I did post a very special thread for you today...

www.drudge.com

Sana,
He isn't imitating patriots; he is singing Metallica:

So be it
Threaten no more
To secure peace is to prepare for war
So be it
Settle the score
Touch me again for the words that youll hear evermore...

Dont tread on me

www.lyricsfreak.com

You're still nothing but a dim imitation of real patriots who coined that slogan.

But I did post a very special thread for you today...

www.drudge.com

#128 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I saw that episode and just like this morning when I FORCED MYSLEF TO LISTEN TO the lady in charge of this fasicsts congress....I foreced myslef to listen to him then...

but thanks anyway.........

and as I continue my way through the franlin bio, the similarities between their fight with tyranny from england and our fight with liberal fasicsm from washington is downright spooky...OOPS SORRY

AM I ALLOWED TO use the term 'spooky' these days?

and as I continue my way through the franlin bio, the similarities between their fight with tyranny from england and our fight with liberal fasicsm from washington is downright spooky...

#130 | Posted by afkabl2

I understand the bio-pic will star Rush as Franklin, Billo as Jefferson, Hannity as Revere, and Coulter as George Washington.

and obama can be benedict arnold....

OH BOOOM

I love peeps like afkabl2 who loosely toss around
terms like "liberal fascism" so many times in a single paragraph or posting that they lose what little irrelevant meaning that they would have had, had you only used them once...

p.s. not every Democrat is a "liberal fascist"
p.p.s. most are not
p.p.p.s. while a few on the Liberal side of the
democratic party make me even cringe from
time to time--namely I'm thinking of
N. Pelosi here, I have yet to see or read
that she has become a certified fascist...

lol. from directly above...

"and obama can be benedict arnold...

OH BOOOM"

no offense AFKABL2, but what are you, like 5?

My son is only 11, and even he is more cogent than that...

Don't mind me, I'll just go back to being a liberal,
commie, pinko, fascist fed, saving your ass just every day...

We in Minnesota are very proud of our Michele Bachmans and that little Bush-baby Coleman. BTW: The only way the GOP knows how to win an election is by stealing it.

Let's hear it for freezing the GOP out of power for the next 50 years so we can make some progress in this country.

Let's hear it for freezing the GOP out of power for the next 50 years so we can make some progress in this country.

you poor bastard

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable