HOW CHICKENSHIT IS JOHN McCAIN?

[Ugly Dougly]

McCain is fuckin funny!

trailing 8-12 points in national polls, he states with unlimited fantasy:

"We've got obama right were we want him!"

Hey, this isn't baseball in mid season and 4 games behind. It's two games behind in the world series!

And what about those Red Soxs


AIIZ

He gets his soundbites from a Daffy Duck cartoon.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

McCarthy reincarnated as the McCain!

Now he is talking about the NEW Socialists Litmus test of all government politicians and workers!

You will be Black Booked. The FBI has files on anyone that voiced their constitutional freedom of speech. Yes everyone of you eplayans have been watched- especially those that anti or have used anti in their playan names, like Anti-M to Anti-Does-it-Matter.

He's Bush. The man who systematically weakened the constitution with his So Called Patriot Act! He will expand torture. Enact greater censure laws to include and get rid of show like: South Park, the Jon Steward Show and replace them with 50's and 60's shows like: Father Knows Best and The Donna Reed Show.

School Teachers, police officers and even Disposal engineers will be given the TEST!



AIIZ

[RingO'Fire]

I keep looking for the transgressions 'from the other side'.

I find things like 'voter intimidation'--but even some of those are questionable....

Then there's really specious ones where simply making sure everyone registered is actually qualified to vote. This is called all sorts of things--'suppression', 'disenfranchisement', 'purging'...

I haven't found any accounts of fake registrations or ballot stuffing. I haven't found any allegations of illegal electioneering.

Quite frankly, save for a few underhanded actions... most of the practices that Republicans engage in seem to be completely legal--and only frustrating to those trying to have people vote illegally.

Lurker,

The entire Republican vote-suppression, voter-purging, election-stealing strategy is laid bare in an article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Greg Palast in this month's issue of Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/st ... k_the_vote.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also did a fairly thorough expose article on the exact methods used to steal the 2004 presidential election in Ohio. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... ion_stolen

It appears that the Republican Party has adopted the following maxim, attributed to Josef Stalin: "It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes."

You may be right though. It may all be legal. However, it seems pretty clear to me that the Reps aren't targeting those trying to vote illegally, since there have been very, very few cases nationwide of people trying to vote illegally. The whole argument "What?! All we're trying to do here is prevent illegal voting, that's all!" is total bullshit and a political red herring.

They are using any and every means at their disposal to erect roadblocks to registration of new voters that aren't likely to vote Rep, and to likewise remove legal voters from the registration roles that aren't likely to vote their way.

I'm not saying that the Reps invented these dirty election-rigging tricks out of thin air around 2000 or so. We all know politics is a dirty business and has been since it's inception. Vote tampering and election-rigging, at the local and State level, are nothing new.

What I am saying is that never before in the history of our country has there been such a brazen, concerted, nationwide effort to steal a national election (with the possible exceptions of the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004). This is a new, all-time low. In my opinion, the very future of our republic is put in peril by these tactics.

[Elderberry]

Very well said RingO'Fire

JK

[lurker]

Let's pick the article apart, shall we?

Though first, I do have to say that any article that insists that Republicans are trying to 'drum up' charges of vote fraud after the Democrat mayor of Miami was removed from office and replaced with his Republican opponent because of massive, proven vote fraud is clearly an article that has lying as it's main premise.

1. Obstructing Voter-Registration Drives

This one takes umbrage at the idea that voter registration groups should be fined if they don't turn in the registrations on time. Now, if they DON'T turn the registrations in on time, everyone they registered will not be able to vote. But this is 'suppression'. You'd think the Dems would WANT the registrations to get in on time. I wonder why they don't? Why does simply getting peoples names on registration forms seem more important than actually getting those registration forms IN to Democrats? Could it be that a bunch of registered Dems will sway polls before the election?

2. Demanding "Perfect Matches"

Republicans want to make sure that the person that registered is the person that votes! Horrors! There are legitimate reasons why things might not match--but it is the voters responsibility to see that they do--or accept the provisional ballot. And I've gotta say, the example lends itself more easily to foul play than to honest error--15,000 'typing errors? Please.

3. Purging Legitimate Voters From the Rolls

Now this could be legit--legal, but still a questionable practice. Are there stats on how many people have gone to the polls, who are legitimate voters, who found themselves forced to cast a provo? How big IS this problem?

4. Requiring Unnecessary Voter ID's

ID is not 'unnecessary when voting. That's not debateable. Take away that and ANYONE could cast your ballot. Given the people who don't like IDs I suspect that they've already got people waiting in the wings to do just that. This one lends itself to fraudulent voting.

5. Rejecting "Spoiled" Ballots

What are people supposed to do? Guess? It's the voters responsibility to not screw up their ballot--if you can't do that, too bad for you. Talking about grasping at straws.

6. Challenging "Provisional" Ballots

Don't see a problem with this at all--and I know they get discarded if they won't alter the outcome. If there's a ten vote split between two candidates, and you've got 9 provos, they won't affect the outcome--so they're tossed.

And checking addresses? Again, it's the voters responsibility to make sure his/her info is current. And letters don't simply 'go back' to the post office "because the voter was away at school or serving in the military"--they get sent back if there's no one there by that name. Someone in the military uses the military system--so that bit was included to fake support for our 'disenfranchised troops'. Someone at school would have parents to verify the address.

Again, grasping at straws.

Finally, none of this is illegal, and all of it is used by the Dems as well as the Republicans.

All in all a waste of text space. Well, not really, the sheep will eat it up.

[lurker]

It appears that the Republican Party has adopted the following maxim, attributed to Josef Stalin: "It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes."

I'd hang that on the Dems, myself.

Couple of years ago I did a temp stint with our local Board of Elections. I was with a group of people assembling electronic voting machine component.

The person in charge of insuring that the machines were zeroed out? The mayors' brother--a Democrat, and a political appointee.

And hey! the mayor got re-elected! Imagine that.

Went to the local media. No one cared.

You find a lot of Dems on Election Boards.

[Elderberry]

Hey lurker, I have one for you--my vote was almost surpressed this year. I've been registered for years; I wanted to sign up for permanent vote-by-mail and have the ballot sent to my PO Box. After more than enough time to have heard back from voter registration; I decided to call and see what the hold-up was. After literally multiple calls and hours on hold, I was finally directed to a supervisor where I was informed that my registration was "on hold" because my address was NOT A RESIDENCE address. This is the same address I have been living at for years. They insisted that they send someone out to 'check out my place'. You can guess my response to that!!!!

As I didn't really have enough time to fight this with them, I just re-registered using my partner's address and my PO Box as the mailing address. I was 're-registered' and finally got my ballot.

Now my driver's license address does not match my voter registration address. Who's fault is that? Was this an attempt to suppress my vote here in Los Angeles California????? I doubt it, but if this sort of thing can happen here, I can only imagine that horrors that are occuring in the toss-up states.

JK

[lurker]

Actually, jkisha, your case seems pretty straightforward.

Registered voter, voted for years the traditional way, suddenly decides to do 'ballot-by-mail' and gives a PO Box.

That's what sent up the red flag.

I had to vote provo in the last election because somehow the COA form that I sent out at the same time as my wifes didn't get to the Board of Elections. Could it be that she's registered 'D' in this cycle and I'm registered 'R'(we switch every 4 years)?

Or was it an honest mistake? Don't know--and, since I can't do a damned thing about it, made sure it was corrected and forgot it.

[World Power Foundation]

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."

- Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

[Elderberry]

Actually, jkisha, your case seems pretty straightforward.

I think this is the thing I dislike most about you; you seem to find everything "straigtforward" base on "your point of view". You truly have no reguard for the opinions (feelings) of others because you are so convinced that you are correct that you are incapible of experiencing empathy toward others. Your main concern is to prove and defend what you believe is correct, rather than accept even the remotest possibility that your "'well researched' and 'entrenched'" views are correct.

JK

[littleflower]

pot calling kettle black alert...

[Elderberry]

pot calling kettle black alert...

I don't think so.

JK

[littleflower]

pot calling kettle black alert...

I don't think so.

JK

of course you don't ... we never do ...

but i don't see you ever giving anything ... not on the eplaya ...

and yes, that's very likely true of me, as well... we are an opinionated bunch, aren't we?

[Elderberry]

pot calling kettle black alert...

I don't think so.

JK

of course you don't ... we never do ...

but i don't see you ever giving anything ... not on the eplaya ...

and yes, that's very likely true of me, as well... we are an opinionated bunch, aren't we?

the difference is that my 'opinions' are as good as facts!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463199532056477.html

JK

[Apollonaris Zeus]

McCain is talking about deregulating the insurance companies now!

[betrdanevr]

What a fucking HOOT!

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/20/mcc ... insurance/

[quote]As Yglesias writes, McCain is “such an enthusiast about financial market deregulation that he was bragging about his plan to make the health care system as awesome as the financial system.â€

[Simon of the Playa]

JKISHA vs. LURKER in the THUNDERDOME 2009!!!

[lurker]

Hey, Simon, that might be fun.....kaiju big battle style--I'll be Cthulhu....

I think this is the thing I dislike most about you; you seem to find everything "straigtforward" base on "your point of view".

What point of view? When an established voter changes their voting style to one that is markedly different the BoE SHOULD take an interest--to make sure the voters franchise is not being hijacked.

You truly have no reguard for the opinions (feelings) of others

This had nothing to do with 'feelings'--I just pointed out that the situation didn't look sinister.

Mine, OTOH, was not so obvious--considering that the CoAs were mailed the same day, at the same Post Office--the only difference being the name and the party affiliation listed. That, and I KNOW our BoE is infested with Democrats--having worked with them. But I shrugged it off.

because you are so convinced that you are correct that you are incapible of experiencing empathy toward others.

I didn't see you empathizing with me....as littleflower said, pot, meet kettle.

Your main concern is to prove and defend what you believe is correct, rather than accept even the remotest possibility that your "'well researched' and 'entrenched'" views are correct.

Well, that's because they ARE 'well researched'. See, I, unlike you, research, admit and put forth problems with BOTH sides. I know the huge flaws of McCain/Palin--and I have no problem talking about the REAL flaws that exist. You gloss over, ignore, and even exhult in the flaws of the candidates you espouse. And, while you love to talk about the real flaws of McCain/Palin, you wander into propagandistic balderdash all too often.

I picked apart that absurdly partisan mess that RFKJ stuck in Rolling Stone and NO ONE has refuted ANYTHING I said.

So, yeah, I'm pretty confident in my positions.

the difference is that my 'opinions' are as good as facts!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463199532056477.html

JK

Facts about what? Some private citizen who isn't running for anything? I know more about this 'Joe' guy that I do about Obama--particularly since using the words in his books is verboten.

[Apollonaris Zeus]

[quote="betrdanevr"]What a fucking HOOT!

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/20/mcc ... insurance/

[quote]As Yglesias writes, McCain is “such an enthusiast about financial market deregulation that he was bragging about his plan to make the health care system as awesome as the financial system.â€

[lurker]

Besides the mortgage related crap, and it's fallout, how's the rest of the banking/credit industry doing? I know that the compzanies who stayed away from Fanni/Freddie seem to be doing booming business.

And what regs does McCain want looked at? I believe allowing more consumer choice is part of it--letting people buy across states lines and such. That kinda thing hurts corporate monopolies--isn't that a GOOD thing? Ram some competition up Big Insurances ass?

And wasn't McCain part of the coalition who helped push through the stuff that makes it harder for insurance to refuse you with a pre-existing condition? Seems like that was a good reg to be rid of.

Dunno, it seems like you're just jerking your knee to the term 'de-regulation'. Bet you'll like de-regulation of laws that apply to stem-cell research--yes? De-regulation isn't always a bad thing.

[Simon of the Playa]

I'll be Cthulhu....

[Apollonaris Zeus]

And what regs does McCain want looked at? I believe allowing more consumer choice is part of it--letting people buy across states lines and such. That kinda thing hurts corporate monopolies--isn't that a GOOD thing? Ram some competition up Big Insurances ass?

I buy across state lines already! No change there so that's bullshit. Look at the credit co that are centered where? In the most liberal states with the least amount of Regs. So they can charge higher interest rates then the states that were limiting rates. Rates that suck the life out of the consumer and allow them to pound on the excessive late and other crap fees that are predatory!

And wasn't McCain part of the coalition who helped push through the stuff that makes it harder for insurance to refuse you with a pre-existing condition? Seems like that was a good reg to be rid of.

The not a regulation that was set my government but enacted by the industry itself? Give me proof?

Did you vote for bush? Did you support the Iraq war?

What hapened to the word: Modified!
AIIZ

[Elderberry]

What point of view? When an established voter changes their voting style to one that is markedly different the BoE SHOULD take an interest--to make sure the voters franchise is not being hijacked.

THIS WAS NOT A MAJOR CHANGE TO MY "VOTING STYLE".

THE WAY THEY HANDLED MY CHANGE REQUEST WAS WHAT WAS HIJACKING MY FRANCHISE TO VOTE. Due dilligence is one thing--what they did would have disenfrancished anyone that was new to the process.

Again, I am amazed how you know everything about everything.

And just for the record, my opinion as to your objectivity or lack there-of was formed more from reading your replies to the posts of others than it did to your replies to my posts. You perporting to know more than I, about a situation that I had just LIVED through, was only the icing on the cake.

Again I take solice in one of my favorite quotes--"Opinions are like ass holes; everybody has one--and they're all full of shit." Some more-so than others.

JK

[Elderberry]

JKISHA vs. LURKER in the THUNDERDOME 2009!!!

Trouble maker!

JK

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Two men enter

One man leaves!

[lurker]

Given your tone, I decided to look over what I said regarding your situation--

Actually, jkisha, your case seems pretty straightforward.

Registered voter, voted for years the traditional way, suddenly decides to do 'ballot-by-mail' and gives a PO Box.

That's what sent up the red flag.

That's it. That prompted this--

I think this is the thing I dislike most about you; you seem to find everything "straigtforward" base on "your point of view". You truly have no reguard for the opinions (feelings) of others because you are so convinced that you are correct that you are incapible of experiencing empathy toward others. Your main concern is to prove and defend what you believe is correct, rather than accept even the remotest possibility that your "'well researched' and 'entrenched'" views are correct.

I didn't say that you were wrong. I didn't say that I knew better than you I just offered an alternate scenario that seemed more likely than someone trying to suppress your vote.

No 'definates', just 'seems'.

I think you're mad because I provided a calm reasonable explanation for something that you were using as a way to feel 'persecuted'. But again, that's an opinion. Hence 'I think'.

Quite frankly, regarding my objectivity, I read what's been posted, check links, cites, and vids, and do whatever I can to know whereof I speak.

I often find myself denied the same courtesy. What I link gets ignored or perfunctorily shot down--with specious arguments or out and out vitriol.

And I've said so several times--it's like you all can't look honestly at things, can't see legitimate problems--or even act as if those problems are assets.

I can rip McCain--because I think he's a deeply flawed candidate. And I can rip Obama for the exact same reason. You can't seem to see ANY flaws in Obama.

So when it comes to a lack of objectivity--take a good hard look in the mirror.

[Elderberry]

I'm not mad God Damn It!

Please understand that I really don't give a crap about any of this. I just enjoy the banter and being able to rant. But I still don't agree with anything you said--you are more into rationalization than my partner accuses me of being into rationalizing.

Most times I don't even read the entire posts when I respond--just a sentence or two that gets me riled up. I don't care how 'thoughtful' my answers are, as I don't usually give them much thought.

I do like getting a reaction--be it for being totally right or being totally wrong--it's the reaction that I like.

And it's easy to get a reaction from 'some' people here.

So rant on.

JK

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Wow, is McCain seeing the truth and is he too late to change the polls!!!

He followed the Neo-con artists of his party to get their anointment of his candidacy. But that wasn't the key to winning the election. He needed to hear the people: that they were upset with why and who got america to this point: Bush!

People are pissed off at bush and what does he do: he kisses his ass and he is going to loss.

McCain will now attack Bush. Bush is the villain! That should have been his focus to connect with the disaffected of not only his party but the general population from the beginning. Sure it would piss off the neo-cons of his party, but it would get him into office. He failed to read the public and its another reason while I wouldn't vote for him.

Will it be too late of a strategy change? Yes! But its his only chance.

Watch McCain. I know they are reading Eplaya, so is Osama!

OK I'm going back work

AIIZ

[Ugly Dougly]

You can't seem to see ANY flaws in Obama.

It's called the "True Believer Syndrome" and it will be over soon.

[Elderberry]

Two men enter

One man leaves!

Another trouble maker!

JK