McCain v Obama

Everything Political

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:10 pm

ryguy wrote:Ray - I think he answered that question a number of posts up - but he disagreed with you that her gender was as important to the Republicans as how "electrifying" her personality/background/looks/etc... would be. At least that's how I understood the comment.

This is what lost_shaman wrote way up in this thread:

Seriously, the Coup here is not that Gov. Palin is a woman, it is that Gov. Palin is SO ELECTRIFYING! None of McCains other potential V.P. Nominees had any hope of being as popular as Gov. Palin.


It appears that the two of you might be talking past each other?


I would accept that if LS were not so obviously avoiding a very simple question. In accordance with RU rules, I referred to evidence to back up my claim (i.e. the McCain ad after the RNC which featured a former Hillary supporter stating her newfound support for McCain). Clearly, if the RNC and McCain thought it was important enough to put that ad together and air it, that would suggest that the gender of Palin was at least one of their metrics for selecting her. And the ad itself is all about turning support from Hillary to McCain. So I have presented evidence, and I have simply asked LS to answer a very simple question about whether he thinks Palin's gender had nothing to do with McCain/RNC selecting her. I didn't ask whether he thought it was the most important, and clearly I have agreed that Palin has more positive attributes for garnering votes than just her gender. Heck, she clearly has more experience than Obama. LOL.

I would also submit that this is not the first time LS has slithered away from having to admit one thing that detracts from his chosen position. I have seen it a lot, not only in my own sparring with him but in AD's as well. So for once I would just like him to grow a pair and answer my question...for I do not think he can answer it any way but one...and that one way to answer it would certainly cause him to have to admit there is at least one chink in his armor. It is silly, perhaps, but I have been known to be a bit of a pitbull, especially when people get evasive when their position has been shown to be less than they make it out to be.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA


Re: McCain v Obama

Postby ryguy » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:50 pm

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:It is silly, perhaps, but I have been known to be a bit of a pitbull, especially when people get evasive when their position has been shown to be less than they make it out to be.

Ray


um...yeah I won't disagree with that, Ray. :)
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

ACORN & Voter Fraud in Sin City?

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:38 pm

I know Mike Jamieson seems to be a pretty upstanding guy, and while I do not begrudge him his beliefs on who would make a better next president, I am wondering what his views are on this news story that is now breaking:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/07 ... stigation/

ACORN Vegas Office Raided in Voter Fraud Investigation

Secretary of State spokesman Bob Walsh says ACORN is accused of submitting multiple voter registrations with false and duplicate names.


We always hear the allegations by the DEMs against the REPUBS as if the REPUBS are the only ones who could possibly commit voter fraud. But clearly ACORN is much more left-leaning than right-leaning. So with all of Mike's focus on his state's position in possibly electing Obama, I wonder what his thoughts are on this.

Cheating in Las Vegas? Say it isn't so!!! :lol:
Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby lost_shaman » Tue Oct 07, 2008 11:17 pm

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:I would accept that if LS were not so obviously avoiding a very simple question. In accordance with RU rules, I referred to evidence to back up my claim (i.e. the McCain ad after the RNC which featured a former Hillary supporter stating her newfound support for McCain). Clearly, if the RNC and McCain thought it was important enough to put that ad together and air it, that would suggest that the gender of Palin was at least one of their metrics for selecting her. And the ad itself is all about turning support from Hillary to McCain. So I have presented evidence, and I have simply asked LS to answer a very simple question about whether he thinks Palin's gender had nothing to do with McCain/RNC selecting her. I didn't ask whether he thought it was the most important, and clearly I have agreed that Palin has more positive attributes for garnering votes than just her gender. Heck, she clearly has more experience than Obama. LOL.

I would also submit that this is not the first time LS has slithered away from having to admit one thing that detracts from his chosen position. I have seen it a lot, not only in my own sparring with him but in AD's as well. So for once I would just like him to grow a pair and answer my question...for I do not think he can answer it any way but one...and that one way to answer it would certainly cause him to have to admit there is at least one chink in his armor. It is silly, perhaps, but I have been known to be a bit of a pitbull, especially when people get evasive when their position has been shown to be less than they make it out to be.

Ray


This entire post by Ray above is nothing but a big fat ad hominem!

As for the T.V. ad you are referring to as evidence, it aired on 8/25/08 the day of the DNC not after the RNC.

TV Ad: Debra

In the ad nothing suggests that gender is a factor! The woman in the ad "Debra" specifically cites Hillary's "experience and judgement" and McCain's "experience and judgement" twice. If this ad seems like 'evidence' to you to the point that you're reading into it that McCain choose Palin based on her gender then you're seriously suffering from a bad case of confirmation bias if you ask me.

It was also completely legit for McCain go after Obama by highlighting his lack of experience and judgement even to the point of comparing Obama's lack there of to Hillary's experience. Gender isn't an issue here! There are also other McCain ads that that follow this specific M.O..

See...

TV Ad: Passed Over

This ad aired 8/24/08, the day before the one discussed above. Here Hillary herself via edited sound bites is used to go after Obama.

In this discussion these two ads show an M.O. that involves highlighting Obama's inexperience, not Hillary's gender. And neither of these ads are "evidence" that McCain choose Palin based on her gender.

On a related note, Ray acts as if he is only asking me a simple question that he implies I won't answer. Nothing could be further from reality as this is a BOGUS debate tactic. The reality is that I originally took issue with the radical and nonsensical statements Ray was making.

Allow me to quote Ray,... "Does everyone just completely ignore the FACT that the selection of Palin was a PLOY advanced by the Republican Party Powerful to SPECIFICALLY highlight the arrogance and hypocrisy of the Dems? There is little doubt in my mind that is exactly why she was chosen."

To which I responded... "If you believe that then you are literally saying Palin was chosen because she is a woman! Specifically because the DEMS rejected Hillary!"

And to which Ray specifically stated and agreed with me on HIS position that... "Palin was chosen not only because she has MORE experience than Obama, but also because she is a woman." (Emphasis mine.) And snip,... " the Republican machine wanted nothing more than to present a FEMALE Veep (to take Hillary supporters) and also someone with MORE experience than Obama."

Despite these absurd assumptions that Ray makes out of thin Air and states as FACT, he hasn't revised a single one of these statements all the while attacking me personally for allegedly not answering his questions regarding his statements which were ridiculous in the first place and that I absolutely have answered!




Edit: Ray I also want to add this... Let me quote you...

I would also submit that this is not the first time LS has slithered away from having to admit one thing that detracts from his chosen position. I have seen it a lot, not only in my own sparring with him but in AD's as well.


Ray, I challenge you to take issue with anything I've ever posted on RU and I will discuss that with you in the open forum. Otherwise don't sit here and Tar and Feather me if you are not going to be specific and allow me to defend my position on any given subject.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby Access Denied » Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:32 am

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:I would accept that if LS were not so obviously avoiding a very simple question. In accordance with RU rules, I referred to evidence to back up my claim (i.e. the McCain ad after the RNC which featured a former Hillary supporter stating her newfound support for McCain).

Well, as Ryan pointed out, he did answer the question… clearly he doesn’t agree with you. The truth is nobody but McCain and his campaign knows for sure why he chose Palin… although I would agree with you it seems fairly obvious gender played no small part in that decision. Why else would he pick somebody who clearly doesn’t have a firm grasp of the larger issues facing our country?

[ha ha… got you both with that one!]

Anyway, seeing how this is the Political forum which largely deals with opinion, in this case I must say your appeal to the board rules seems a little over the top wouldn’t you agree?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:I would also submit that this is not the first time LS has slithered away from having to admit one thing that detracts from his chosen position. I have seen it a lot, not only in my own sparring with him but in AD's as well.

Well yes that’s true [with me] but you’ve got to admit he’s got some amazingly thick skin. ;)
Last edited by Access Denied on Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Added [with me] for clarification.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby Access Denied » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:07 am

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:None of those terms were directed at you, personally. But if you wish to take them that way, there is not much I can do about it.

Didn’t think they were. They seem directed at anybody who thinks Obama is a better choice than McCain.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:I hope you are not suggesting that there are no high-profile people (mostly Hollywood types) and news media outlets (NBC anyone?) who are not precisely "fawning" over Obama or treating him as "hallowed"? Are you?

I’m sorry but you’re sounding like a Rush Limbaugh clone again with his complaints about the “drive by media” and no, I don’t think he’s getting “special” treatment… remember reverendgate?

In fact yesterday morning on MSNBC (web) there were three different articles on the front page about Palin and McCain’s attacks on Obama… if they were “fawning” over Obama why would they be giving them any airtime at all?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:I choose my words carefully, and I believe there is plenty of evidence that shows them to be valid descriptors of how some people imbibe what THEY WANT Obama to be (how he presents himself) as opposed to how he really is (a politician).

Rush is the one who started calling him “The Messiah” (probably because he’s jealous) and the same could be said of McCain supporters… or in your case the ANTI-Obama crowd.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:My stance is NOT non-partisan. It is ANTI-partisan. There is a difference, and I would appreciate you acknowledging that.

OK… but are you, or are you not, a registered Republican?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:Moreover, we already know that the main reason McCain does not parade these actions of his in the media is specifically because the nature of his character, just like McCain has NEVER stooped to using a member of the armed services (not even his progeny!) in a political ad. Again, demonstrated character.

LOL you must be joking… his convention speech was all about playing the “war hero” card and he did it again during the first debate! My best friends were in the Nam and some had it worse than McCain… especially when they got home… but they don’t go around using it as a crutch or wearing it on their sleeves… although they are (bless their hearts) diehard McCain supporters.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:In my view, what we see is the presentation of character by Obama that he and his handlers want you to believe is the real Obama, vs. documented actions that demonstrate character by McCain.

You mean like McCain’s actions as one of the Keating Five? Show me one “presentation” of Obama’s character that is demonstrably false.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:But once again, I do NOT believe McCain deserves the office...not because he lacks character (he is brimming with it), but because he is part of the partisan BS that has had a stranglehold on our nation for way too long.

Well, one of these two men is going to be president whether you like it or not… the question in my mind is not which one is the “lesser of two evils”… that’s like saying the glass is half empty instead of half full... it’s which one offers the best potential for change given the system is broken?

Seems like a no-brainer to me unless you’re happy with the way the Republicans have been running the White House for the last eight years considering McCain has failed to tangibly distinguish himself from the unpopular (even among many Republicans!) policies of Bush and Co. in my opinion.

Once the election’s out of the way THEN we’ve got four years to convince people the only way REAL change is going to happen in Washington is to take away the political parties power over us by registering as independents and stop contributing money to them.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:And BTW, you know that 9% Congressional approval rating? That INCLUDES both Obama and McCain! And it is the Party machinery that have brought you this 9% approval rating.

True and score one for Obama since McCain has been at it a LOT longer than he has.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:And so you think it shows "good character" to promise a bunch of "lift the people up" spending programs that you cannot pay for, and therefore are highly unlikely to be able to deliver?

No, I think that’s par for the course… and one good reason not to let the fear instilled by the Republicans that a vote for Obama is a vote for socialism affect your decision.

For example, I wonder how many people have Hillary’s socialist health care plan confused with Obama’s much more conservative plan?

Fact Check: Obama's health care plan

The Statement: In the vice-presidential debate on Thursday, October 2, in St. Louis, Republican nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama proposes "to mandate health care coverage and have (a) universal, government-run program. And unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds."

[snip]

The Verdict: Mostly False. Obama's plan would increase government's role in health care, and mandate coverage for children, but would include existing health care systems and not mandate universal coverage. There is no evidence in the plan to support Palin's claim that health care would be "taken over by the feds."

Here’s another example…

Fact Check: Is Obama proposing $860 billion+ in new spending?

The statement: At a campaign stop Monday in Columbus, Ohio, Sen. John McCain said Sen. Barack Obama "has proposed more than $860 billion in new spending."

[snip]

The most detailed analysis of McCain's and Obama's budget plans comes from the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The group's president, Maya MacGuineas (pronounced "McGuiness"), called McCain's statement "a misleading figure taken out of context."

[snip]

The committee found that both candidates' fiscal policies call for spending a lot more than they bring in. By 2013, Obama's policies would add $286 billion to that year's deficit, while McCain's policies would add $211 billion, MacGuineas said.

Verdict: Misleading. The figure McCain gave is based on his campaign's tally of the costs of numerous programs Obama has discussed, but ignores the savings from other policy changes Obama is calling for.

I would encourage anyone who may be confused to explore this excellent resource that cuts through the mud coming from both sides…

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/ca ... act-check/

[although it’s been a lot worse from the McCain camp in my opinion]

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:Last time I checked, it took a minimum of TWO people (usually several more) to "end a war". Moreover, the level of the war in Iraq right now is really between differing Iraqi factions. We are merely a lightning rod in the mix. Would you disagree with that?

No, and as such I don’t think it’s a war that can be won like McCain wants… did we not learn anything from our involvement in Vietnam? As far as I’m concerned we already won when we took out Saddam Hussein and his regime… which is what we should have done the first time he rattled his sword and invaded Kuwait.

OK so we tried to do it the “politically correct” way and not leave the innocent Iraqi people hanging and now they have a democratic government to embrace or ignore as they see fit. Great, mission accomplished, now let them sort it out… and should another murderous dictator arise in our absence and start trying to destabilize the region we can always go back in and take him out too. Next…

Meanwhile, our enemy who poses the most immediate threat, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, is still out there… why is that?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:Who are you kidding, AD? As a result of the cost incurred for this "Bailout Plan" taxes are going up whether you like it, or know about it, or not! The question is not if taxes will go up. It is WHOSE taxes will go up, and will it resemble anything "fair"?

BS… we stand to profit from the “bailout” if it’s handled right (and I don’t see why it wouldn’t be) and the bill came with some tax breaks that you, who claims to be a fiscal conservative, should welcome.

All we have to do to avoid tax increases is to start holding our elected officials accountable and demand they get serious about cutting spending and start paying off the national debt… the bailout will simply be “charged” to the total debt in the short term.

As far as being “fair” goes, what do you consider fair?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:But since it is a "maybe" doesn't this also apply to McCain?

Judging by the highly “erratic” way he’s been running his campaign… no.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:And just what do you base this "maybe" on? Did he change things for the better in those Chicago housing tenemants? Last I checked, they still had asbestos, which he promised to get out.

Actually I think that’s probably what led him to seek public office… running up against a bureaucratic wall.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:Evidence? (Other than campaign rhetoric). It would seem his record has cut across what the Repub Party would have favored several times.

Last year he voted 95% of the time with Bush…

[from factcheck.org]

Is it true John McCain voted with George Bush 95 percent of the time?

This year he mostly hasn’t voted.

I’d call that business as usual.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:That is a great sunshine thought. But to be balanced you would also have to agree that giving someone who is little-known a chance could also lead to making things WORSE. Right?

You mean like Palin? You betcha. Not only that, McCain fancies himself a “maverick” with an “attitude”… is that a “quality” you want in the Leader of the Free World? You tell me which ticket is more risky?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:But do they even come close to having the same LEVEL of experience?

I’d say so… in terms of being qualified for the position. They have both demonstrated an intimate knowledge of the issues and have outlined their respective plans to deal with them. What more do you want?

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:That right there is a spin by you. Claiming they both have experience, but not admitting how different their experience bases are. Do you think you are immune to spin yourself, AD?

No it isn’t and no I don’t.

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:Does everyone just completely ignore the FACT that the selection of Palin was a PLOY advanced by the Republican Party Powerful to SPECIFICALLY highlight the arrogance and hypocrisy of the Dems?

Well, I think most undecided/independents (the only voters that really matter at this point) see it for what it really is… a desperate and reckless move by McCain that ultimately backfired.

Anyway, with that I’m officially done with this election… I’ve said all I have to say and I think anything else at this point would just be going around in circles so I say may the best man win…

[although I do plan to revisit Torbjon’s thread “Are people fit to govern themselves?” when I get a chance with something interesting I found]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:33 pm

Access Denied wrote:I’m sorry but you’re sounding like a Rush Limbaugh clone again with his complaints about the “drive by media” and no, I don’t think he’s getting “special” treatment… remember reverendgate?

In fact yesterday morning on MSNBC (web) there were three different articles on the front page about Palin and McCain’s attacks on Obama… if they were “fawning” over Obama why would they be giving them any airtime at all?


You're kidding, right? They have to keep up the pretenses that they are unbiased. But in fact, who do you think benefits from all the coverage about McCain's attacks but scant coverage about McCain's policy statements? I am sorry you don't see it AD, but the media bias is and has been obvious to me over many years. Even today we still talk about Dan Quayle's "potatoe" moment. But we seem to have forgotten about Biden's plagiarism. In fact, speaking of Biden, here is an article that exposes just how wrong he is about the position he is applying for. Why is the media giving this obvious buffoon such a pass, and ganging up on Palin?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html

And have you not seen the obvious bias at NBC? Are your eyes that closed?

OK… but are you, or are you not, a registered Republican?


No. I have always refused to register one party or the other here in CA. Unfortunately, that prevents me from voting in primaries, which is just yet another bit of evidence that proves (beyond a shadow of a doubt) that the two parties have a lock on power. And this explains why we are given a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich in each election... although the media is too happy to portray McCain/Palin in the douche role, but go easy on Obama so he doesn't look like the turd sandwich he really is.

As for the rest....well, if you do not see it, that is your prerogative. Why was FOX the only news outlet to cover the ACORN voter fraud investigation in Las Vegas? I guess all that is left is for people to elect Obama and then revisit his performance over the next four years. Like all Presidents we have had I am sure I will find some things I like (at least I hope), but I am willing to bet he will NOT deliver on the vast majority of the promises he is making that are causing people to think he is the right guy.

The right guy/gal is still "out there" somewhere. And party politics are the ONLY thing that prevent that person from seeing the light of day.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Facts about the Projector Earmark

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:57 pm

Hey AD,

Here are some other "buried" facts that the media seems unwilling to publicize about Obama and how his earmarks go to people who contribute money to him:

http://www.thenextright.com/davidb11171 ... an-earmark

I have been consistent in my point here all along: Obama is nothing new, no shining new hope, nobody that is different than past politicians. He is greedy to get the most powerful job in the world, and has used Federal influence to grease the palms of his donors. Nothing new under the sun. And the media is complicit in not reporting that he is just another slimy pol.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby ryguy » Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:07 pm

Ray, I think the point AD is making is that despite your testifying that you think both candidates are slimy pols, and that you dislike both parties - if one was to comb through this thread I think you'd find an overwhelming unbalance of attacks against Obama vs. attacks against McCain. Wouldn't you agree?

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:13 pm

ryguy wrote:Ray, I think the point AD is making is that despite your testifying that you think both candidates are slimy pols, and that you dislike both parties - if one was to comb through this thread I think you'd find an overwhelming unbalance of attacks against Obama vs. attacks against McCain. Wouldn't you agree?


And what is wrong with compensating for a biased media?

(You like how I slime by a direct question...I am learning from LS) :)

If you want me to point out that McCain was one of the Keating Five back in the days of the S&L scandal, would that make folks feel better? Look, everyone knows McCain is a slimy pol. But I am aghast at the people who are blinded that Obama is NO DIFFERENT. He just has a shorter history of slime.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby Chorlton » Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Surely, all politicians the world over are known by:

"If you can see their lips moving...they are lying"

I watched the debate on Newsnight last night on UK TV and wasnt impressed by either of them, just oh so typical politicians slagging each other off and I failed to see the point of the entire thing. I dont think either of them garnered any support from that episode.
I have become that which I always despised and feared........Old !

My greatest wish, would be to own my own scrapyard.
User avatar
Chorlton
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:21 pm

Here's some more on ACORN voter fraud:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10082008/po ... htm?page=0

As I've noted previously ("ACORN: O's Ugly Ally," June 26), Obama trained ACORN members in Chicago. In turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his Illinois campaigns and ACORN's PAC endorsed him in this year's Democratic primaries back in February.


The question to AD and Ryan is: Do you think Obama does not deserve to have all his skeletons pulled out of his closet? Because the silence of the media over this ACORN stuff is a bit worrying to me. Read further down in that article to see the tales:

Quantity over quality. That's the ACORN way - and the fraud allegations keep piling up:

* Yesterday, Nevada officials raided ACORN's Las Vegas office after election authorities accused the group of submitting multiple voter registrations with fake and duplicate names. Among the bogus monikers: names of former Dallas Cowboys players.

* Lake County, Ind., election officials this month rejected thousands of registration forms ACORN had turned in from its drives this summer. On a conference call yesterday, GOP officials noted that up to 11,000 of the applications were no good - tying up election officials and jeopardizing the voting rights of untold victims whose identities may have been stolen.

In what seems to be ACORN's standard operating procedure, vote canvassers had pulled names and addresses from phone books and forged signatures. According to a local paper (the Northwest Indiana and Illionois Times), "Large numbers of voter registration forms bore signatures all in the same apparent handwriting style" and "apparently the organization's canvassers broke rules to meet ACORN-set voter registration quotas to get paid." The fake registrants include dead people and underage kids.

* Milwaukee, Wisc., officials last month discovered at least seven felons employed as voter-registration workers for ACORN and another affiliated group. (State law bans felons from such work.) They also uncovered a raft of problematic voter-registration cards. The state GOP accuses the group of trying to get dead, imprisoned or imaginary people on the voter rolls. Fraud has plagued ACORN's Milwaukee chapter since the last election cycle.

* In Florida, in Orange County alone, ACORN workers turned in multiple, copycat forms for six separate voters over the summer. The Miami Herald reports: "One individual had 21 duplicate applications."

Election officials had flagged ACORN's negligent practices months ago. But it may be too late: In Orange, Broward and Miami-Dade counties, ACORN has signed up 135,000 new voters, nearly 60 percent of them registered as Democrats - a fifth of all new voters in that region.

* In Ohio, large numbers of homeless people got free van and bus rides to register. Shelby Holliday, a reporter for Palestra.net, filmed ACORN shuttling in some prospects. She told me she spoke with one homeless woman who said ACORN "told her who to vote for if she wanted a 'better life,' and told her not to worry about jury duty (one of the reasons this homeless woman didn't want to register) because the government probably wouldn't be able to track her down. She was registering with a temporary address."


He may soon have the power. We heard similar promises to do great things from Pelosi 2 years ago. Since then, nothing. As much as people may hate Bush, I do not believe it is good for the country to swing to the complete opposite extreme, which is what we are about to get. Our economy (via the stock market) is already in unstable oscillations. And you can just forget the finger-pointing. Both parties share equal blame.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby ryguy » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:39 pm

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:The question to AD and Ryan is: Do you think Obama does not deserve to have all his skeletons pulled out of his closet? Because the silence of the media over this ACORN stuff is a bit worrying to me.


I don't see them as skeletons. I see them as Republican pundits getting desperate and searching through as many of Obama's past affiliations as possible in order to somehow draw a connection between one of them and something unethical or questionable. They are attempting to somehow generate "guilt by association" and they're scratching at whatever pathetic connections they can make. We've seen this same desperation back when McCain was fighting Bush in the Republican primaries and they used the same sort of Swiftboat tactics and attempted to belittle some of his military experience. The far-right Bushesque campaign tactics are pretty transparent, which is why it somewhat bothers me that you're reproducing those sorts of attacks (and linking to extremely biased blogs that promote them) here in this thread. But you have a right to your opinion, and I'm confident enough in our readership to see the propaganda at those sites for what it really is. Just more manufactured political "mud" thrown as hard as possible at the "other guy."

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby Zep Tepi » Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:18 pm

Wrt the mud-slinging and political bias of certain sites, I'm seeing just as much from Obama supporting sites as I am from the other side. FWIW, I think this Acorn thing is important because it is current news - and is certainly being ignored by the MSM.

Cheers,
Steve
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: McCain v Obama

Postby ryguy » Thu Oct 09, 2008 6:21 pm

Fight the Smears

Current News? lol...please.

Blackwell’s attacks against ACORN and community organizers continue a vile Republican pattern of mockery and viciousness against this noble profession. Community organizers are the very individuals Republicans should be celebrating for helping people to help themselves rather than depending on the government.


Speaking of voter fraud - do you think the Republican election commissioner in Ohio is going to pull the old stunt of delivering too few voting machines to lower-class neighborhoods so that the lines are super-long and people in those neighborhoods (primarily Democrat) give up and go home?

Didn't hear about that? I guess the MSM has failed on all all sides throughout the years, hasn't it.

Was the 2004 Election Stolen?

''It was terrible,'' says Sen. Christopher Dodd, who helped craft reforms in 2002 that were supposed to prevent such electoral abuses. ''People waiting in line for twelve hours to cast their ballots, people not being allowed to vote because they were in the wrong precinct -- it was an outrage. In Ohio, you had a secretary of state who was determined to guarantee a Republican outcome. I'm terribly disheartened.''

Indeed, the extent of the GOP's effort to rig the vote shocked even the most experienced observers of American elections. ''Ohio was as dirty an election as America has ever seen,'' Lou Harris, the father of modern political polling, told me. ''You look at the turnout and votes in individual precincts, compared to the historic patterns in those counties, and you can tell where the discrepancies are. They stand out like a sore thumb.''


Republicans complaining about voter fraud is like Martha Stewart complaining about anal-retentive people.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

PreviousNext

Google

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron