The Big Z sleeps FOREVER

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by oddfellow4870, Jun 8, 2006.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. paulbunyon

    paulbunyon

    Messages:
    8,041
    Crazy talk. All of the allegations you mention have been investigated and were found baseless. Other posters (I think OF) in this and other threads previously linked to/posted those articles but I guess you choose to ignore them.
  2. paulbunyon

    paulbunyon

    Messages:
    8,041
    Over 450 raids around Iraq from the info we captured when Zarqawi was killed with over 100 insurgents killed and many captured in those raids. In listening to an expert last night there was a LOT of info about the insurgency and AQ In Iraq on computer hard drives and disks that we got. We have been exploiting that info non-stop in the last week. Killing Zarqawi was a hell of a lot more important than just killing a figurehead like some have alleged. I say bravo to Task Force 145!
  3. Wowie69

    Wowie69

    Messages:
    788
    Oddfellow, thank you for attempting to defend your position.

    But, I think you miss the real point - that our leaders (both Republicans and Democrats) are so hell-bent on WINNING that they will cheat and deceive the public.

    In these situations (the elections of 2000 and 2004) it's pretty damn obvious that it was the Republicans (this time) that were doing the cheating.

    How do you reconcile the fact that Kathryn Harris could be in charge of Florida's recount AND also be in charge of Bush's Florida campaign?

    How's about that two of the Supreme Court justices had family members involved in campaigns to elect Bush?

    How's about that WE NOW KNOW that the Diebold voting machines can be easily manipulated AND those machines were designed by a man who guaranteed a victory for Bush?

    Those are just a couple of reasons that will forever cast doubt on the authenticity of the elections.

    There never will be an answer to satisfy both sides of the fence, but I will always doubt that Bush fairly won either election. And historians will always have that doubt, too.
  4. lamont5123

    lamont5123

    Messages:
    2,415
    Dave,

    Yeah, I was. He just dosen't get it.
  5. DaveNJ

    DaveNJ

    Messages:
    6,849
    I think he was referring to exchanges between the both of you in other political threads.
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2006
  6. argleby

    argleby

    Messages:
    688
    Thanks for covering for me, name.
  7. argleby

    argleby

    Messages:
    688
    Lamont, I made a valid point and I didn't call you any names or insult you. You're just ducking.
  8. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    Fav quote from the above link:

    #

    William Teach wrote:

    No matter what you write, no matter what facts you cite, Commissar, the Left will never, ever believe that Bush did not steal 2004. It is an article of faith with them.

    Cause otherwise, they would have to face the facts that what few ideas and plans they have are unpopular outside of Liberal World. Abortion on demand, high taxes, the Nanny State, handing our security over to the UN, etc, just do not play well with the average American. The average American also does not care to be thought of, and called, an idiot by the so called high brows in the Democratic party.

    Posted 06 Jun 2006 at 8:52 am ¶
  9. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
  10. RoosterC74

    RoosterC74

    Messages:
    4,257
    Couldn't happen to a bigger ass-hole.
  11. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    2. THE MYTH THAT AFRICAN AMERICANS WERE INCORRECTLY PLACED ON THE CONVICTED-FELONS LIST AT A HIGHER RATE THAN OTHER GROUPS

    The evidence on convicted felons comes from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission's Majority Report, which states: "The chance of being placed on this list [the exclusion list] in error is greater if the voter is African-American." The evidence they provide indicates that African-Americans had a greater share of successful appeals. However, since African-Americans also constituted an even greater share of the list to begin with, whites were actually the most likely to be erroneously on the list (a 9.9-percent error rate for whites versus only a 5.1-percent error rate for blacks). The rate for Hispanics (8.7 percent) is also higher than for blacks. The Commission's own table thus proves the opposite of what they claim. A greater percentage of whites and Hispanics who were placed on the disqualifying list were originally placed there in error.

    In any case, this evidence has nothing to do with whether people were in the end improperly prevented from voting, and there are no data presented on that point. The Majority Report's evidence only examines those who successfully appealed and says nothing about how many of those who didn't appeal could have successfully done so.

    3. THE MYTH THAT GORE WOULD HAVE WON IF RECOUNT HAD ONLY BEEN ALLOWED
    There were two news consortiums conducting massive recounts of Florida's ballots. One group was headed by USA Today and the Miami Herald. The other one was headed by eight newsgroups including the Washington Post, New York Times, L.A. Times, Chicago Tribune, the Associated Press, and CNN. Surprisingly, the two groups came to very similar conclusions. To quote from the USA Today group's findings (May 11, 2001) on different recounts:

    Who would have won if Al Gore had gotten the manual counts he requested in four counties? Answer: George W. Bush.

    Who would have won if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand recount of undervotes, which are ballots that registered no machine-readable vote for president? Answer: Bush, under three of four standards.

    Who would have won if all disputed ballots — including those rejected by machines because they had more than one vote for president — had been recounted by hand? Answer: Bush, under the two most widely used standards; Gore, under the two least used.

    Of course, Florida law provided no mechanism to ask for a statewide recount a la the last option, only county-by-county recounts. And of course neither Gore's campaign nor the Florida Supreme Court ever asked for such a recount.

    4. DON'T FORGET THE EARLY MEDIA CALL

    Florida polls were open until 8 P.M. on election night. The problem was that Florida's ten heavily Republican western-panhandle counties are on Central, not Eastern, time. When polls closed at 8 P.M. EST in most of the state, the western-panhandle polling places were still open for another hour. Yet, at 8 Eastern, all the networks (ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and NBC) incorrectly announced many times over the next hour that the polls were closed in the entire state. CBS national news made 18 direct statements that the polls had closed.

    Polling conducted after the election indicates that the media had an impact on voter behavior, and that the perception of Democratic wins discouraged Republican voters. Democratic strategist Bob Beckel concluded Mr. Bush suffered a net loss of up to 8,000 votes in the panhandle after Florida was called early for Gore. Another survey of western-panhandle voters conducted by John McLaughlin & Associates, a Republican polling company, immediately after the election estimated that the early call cost Bush approximately 10,000 votes.

    Using voting data for presidential elections from 1976 to 2000, my own own empirical estimates that attempted to control for a variety of factors affecting turnout imply that Bush received as many as 7,500 to 10,000 fewer votes than he would normally have expected. Little change appears to have occurred in the rate that non-Republicans voted.

    Terry McAuliffe clearly stated his strategy "to use the anger and resentment that will come out of that 2000 election, put it in a positive way to energize the Democratic base." Democrats have used the notion that Bush is an illegitimate president to justify everything from their harsh campaign rhetoric to their filibusters against his judicial appointments.

    More could be said about these myths, but most of them hardly merit discussion. Unfortunately, as Terry McAuliffe implies, these falsehoods will continue to be trumpeted frequently over the next year; thankfully, a few facts can help dispel them.

    — John Lott is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His data on the Florida 2000 election may be found at www.johnrlott.com.
  12. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    Fine, since you don't want to read the link:

    Let the Sunshine In
    The same old myths live on about Florida, Nov. 2000.

    By John R. Lott Jr.

    Headlines this weekend recited the old line "Dems accuse Bush of stealing the 2000 election." Former U.S. Representative Carrie Meek received a wildly enthusiastic response from delegates to the Florida Democratic convention with calls that "We should be ready for revenge!" Retired General Wesley Clark told delegates he fought for democracy and free elections in Vietnam and Europe only to see "the taking" of the presidency by Republicans in 2000. Senator John Edwards said, "We had more votes; we won!" Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts said: "None of us are going to forget." More vaguely, Senator Joe Lieberman claimed that Bush "stretched the truth" to get his way in 2000. Of course, Terry McAuliffe was beating the same old drum. They should all get over it.

    The stolen election supposedly incorporated many wrongs, but foremost was discrimination against Democratic African-American voters: Faulty voting machines were said to have thrown out their votes at higher rates. Also included are claims that the voters' intent wasn't properly divined, that Republicans on the Supreme Court felt compelled to covertly snatch the election, and that African-Americans were intimidated into not voting or were erroneously placed on the ineligible list at higher rates than other racial groups.

    These charges have been rebutted before, but with so much misinformation and people's short memories simply accepting the charges, many risk believing that they are true. There has also been new research — of which most people may not be aware — which helps replace myth with reality.

    1. THE MYTH OF THE FLAWED VOTING MACHINES & DEMOCRATIC DISENFRANCHISEMENT

    Suppose spoiled or non-voted ballots really did indicate disenfranchisement, rather than voter preferences. Then, according to the precinct-level vote data compiled by USA Today and other newspapers, the group most victimized in the Florida voting was African-American Republicans, and by a dramatic margin, too.

    Earlier this year I published an article in the Journal of Legal Studies analyzing the USA Today data, and it shows that African-American Republicans who voted were 54 to 66 times more likely than the average African American to cast a non-voted ballot (either by not marking that race or voting for too many candidates). To put it another way: For every two additional black Republicans in the average precinct, there was one additional non-voted ballot. By comparison, it took an additional 125 African Americans (of any party affiliation) in the average precinct to produce the same result.

    Some readers may be surprised that black Republicans even exist in Florida, but, in fact, there are 22,270 such registered voters — or about one for every 20 registered black Democrats. This is a large number when you consider that the election in the state was decided by fewer than 1,000 votes. Since these Republicans were more than 50 times more likely to suffer non-voted ballots than other African Americans, the reasonable conclusion is that George W. Bush was penalized more by the losses of African-American votes than Al Gore.

    Democrats have also claimed that low-income voters suffered non-voted ballots disproportionately. Yet, the data decisively reject this conclusion. For example, the poorest voters, those in households making less than $15,000 a year, had non-voted ballots at less than one-fifteenth the rate of voters in families making over $500,000.

    It is difficult to believe that wealthy people were more confused by the ballot than poor people. Perhaps the rich or black Republicans simply did not like the choices for president and so did not vote on that part of the ballot. Perhaps there was tampering, but it is difficult to see how it could have been carried out and covered up. We may never know, but, clearly, the figures show that income and race were only one-third as important in explaining non-voted ballots as the methods and machines used in voting. For example, setting up the names in a straight line appears to produce many fewer problems than listing names on different pages or in separate columns.
  13. Wowie69

    Wowie69

    Messages:
    788
    I agree with Lamont.

    Both election had some VERY DUBIOUS actions by the Republicans.

    Sadly, you guys choose to attack Lamont. Why don't you attack the facts?

    I see no one here disputing the facts that there was election fraud in the election. Argleby's efforts to claim that the networks caused Bush to lose some votes is the only attempt to refute the OVEDWHELMING EVIDENCE that shows wide-spread election deception by the Republicans. And Agrleby's claim was a result that was not caused by Democratic fraud.

    Diebold, the guy that makes the electronic voting machines GUARANTEED a victory for Bush in 2004.

    Wake up guys. This ain't no crack-pot conspiracy theory. Get the facts, and try to refute them if you can. Simply labeling someone a nut is not the way to prove your case.
  14. Mr. User Name

    Mr. User Name

    Messages:
    1,955
    Lamont, once again you've taken the coward's way to avoid the answer. You are a joke.
  15. lamont5123

    lamont5123

    Messages:
    2,415
    Argleby,

    You're a waste of time.

    You spew too many personal insults for an intelligent person like myself to take seriously.

    Move along now.
  16. argleby

    argleby

    Messages:
    688
    Btw, Lamont, it's interesting you don't mention the biggest scandal of the 2000 Florida vote, which was the networks calling the state for Gore an hour before polls closed in the heavily Republican panhandle. That little mistake is believed to have cost Bush between 7,500 and 10,000 votes. Had Bush gotten those votes there never would have been a controversy to begin with.

    Luckily he was able to win anyway and justice was done.

    If anyone's interested, here's a good article on the Florida election in 2000 and the ridiculous myths people like Lamont like to spread: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200312100915.asp
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2006
  17. oddfellow4870

    oddfellow4870

    Messages:
    3,094
    Love your source. Robert Kennedy Jr, that paragon of journalism. The man who claimed that Bush caused the Hurricanes by not supporting the Kyoto accord.

    This and the Al Gore movie are proof positive that politics is a religion and should be classified as such......

    I'm sure you believe this garbage. I can feel your faith.
  18. Mr. User Name

    Mr. User Name

    Messages:
    1,955
    Rolls Royce, two yachts, at least a half dozen homes around Jersey, a place in Florida another in the Bahamas; not bad for a gym teacher.

    Anybody remember Reverent Ike ?
  19. paulbunyon

    paulbunyon

    Messages:
    8,041
    Hehehehee.........Sharpe James, what skeletons must be in that guys closet?
  20. Mr. User Name

    Mr. User Name

    Messages:
    1,955
    Hey Bunion, Next time you see Lamont see if he has anything good to say about Sharpe James!