Minnesota looks dirty.

[Lycurgus]

Her policy decisions are "faith based." That is how Bush worked too, as I ranted about elsewhere, maybe above on this thread.

Evidence? Things like her saying "If the hearts of alaskans are with God, then this pipeline will be built." Using brainpower, instead of faithpower, you might actually go with a civil engineer instead of God to get a pipeline built.

I don't feel like organizing the thoughts out again, the bottom line is that faith is fundamental to living a meaningful life, but has no place in deciding what policies to run a state or a country.

Caligirl, this proves to me that you have not read any of the documentation concerning the pipeline.

You do not seem stupid, ignorant or unable to comprehend.

The woman expressed her personal hope and personal feelings about it's success, gee, slay her for that.

Thankfully, she backed it up with good negotiations and solid documentation and agreements. Though I'm sure that God was in her heart, no one reported her stopping to ask his advice in the middle of the negotiations.

I must wonder after reading your posts in this thread, do you ever decide your stance based on facts or simply personal likes and dislikes?

Please understand, I am trying to understand your motivation, as the documentation doesn't provide any insight.

 

[pegwinn]

For starters here is the manufacturer admitting that it had code for the past ten years that drops votes in urban (democratic) districts.

Ohio Voting Machines Contained Programming Error That Dropped Votes | The Trail | washingtonpost.com

that's not florida, as electronic machines were not used there in 2000, but should make the point.

I have been trying to find video of ballots being destroyed ahead of the 2000 florida recount. I have seen this but can't put my finger on it at the mo.

I read your link and it appears the the company has been direct and up front about a potential problem. It also appears that the standard cross checking procedure catches errors. Additionally, I believe the comment that I challenged actually was alleging that Florida electronic machines in Y2K contributed to alleged election fraud on the part of the R's.

I understand that folks were desperately searching for some way to miraculously work Gore into the win column. But, this nation is the most litigious in the world. If there was credible evidence of fraud in the elections, there would be a court trail as wide as a six lane highway.

 

[bk1983]

Caligirl, you claim that Obama is more of a centrist than Palin.

Could you please support that with factual documentation from each persons role as a political offial.

You may be correct, but, I have yet to see anything which demonstrates that, but, I am always open to learning.

As for her religion, again I ask you, please show me one piece of documentation where God is listed as her advisor.

I'm a Christian. I keep my religion out of my professional life. However, I do trust God and my Angels to help guide me, protect me and love me, through every aspect of my life.

Oh by the way, I own a business on Main Street, it opened in 1948, yes, that is 60 years of success and God has been with me, in my heart each step of the way. Seems that my concept, which is the same concept Palin has and has demonstrated works. By the way, how long has Obama ran a business on Main Street, since he seems so connected to what that struggle is like.
As I said, please support your factual statements about Palin, I am ready to learn.

I respect your beliefs and applaud your achievements in life. But your logic

is based solely on your beliefs and can be twisted to fit any viewpoint.

For example Bill Gates once said "The specific elements of Christianity are not

something I'm a huge believer in." In terms of doing things I take a fairly

scientific approach to why things happen and how they happen". I dont

think anyone can argue the business sucess of Bill Gates, but that is not

proof that having faith is wrong. The fact is their are a large number of

of non believers who are succesful figures in our history, Warren Buffet and

Albert Einstein come to mind. Yet I dont consider them to be proof that all

science and no faith is what it takes for success.

 

[PoliticalJunky]

Gore took a simple election to the Supreme Court in an attempt to illegally steal a Presidential election. And yet even today the left claims it was all Bush's fault.

Gore did not go to the Supreme Court you dolt. That was Bush. You really need to get your history correct if you are going to talk about history at all.

Here...read this and learn something for once in your life!

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., PETITIONERSv.
ALBERT GORE, Jr., et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[December 12, 2000]


You will notice that it states that the pettioner is george Bush. Please know what you post about before others have to show you how little you do know.

 

[DiveCon]

Gore did not go to the Supreme Court you dolt. That was Bush. You really need to get your history correct if you are going to talk about history at all.

Here...read this and learn something for once in your life!

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., PETITIONERSv.
ALBERT GORE, Jr., et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[December 12, 2000]


You will notice that it states that the pettioner is george Bush. Please know what you post about before others have to show you how little you do know.

Gore took it to the FL supreme court, and i do believe thats what he was refering to

 

[PoliticalJunky]

Gore took it to the FL supreme court, and i do believe thats what he was refering to

Yes, Gore did do that but if that is what he meant then he should have said Florida. If that is what he meant then I apologize to him, but all he said was the Supreme Court. I guess that is what I get for ASSumming! LOLOL

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes, Gore did do that but if that is what he meant then he should have said Florida. If that is what he meant then I apologize to him, but all he said was the Supreme Court. I guess that is what I get for ASSumming! LOLOL

Gore took the election to court. In the end the fact it ended up at the Federal level is Gore's fault for taking it to court. The Florida Supreme Cout violated Florida law and ignored the Lower Court ever time. It would never have ended up in the Federal Court system at all except for the fact Gore took it to court in the hopes a Democratic controlled Florida Supreme Court would side with him.

 

[Ravi]

The op ed piece cited numbers being whittled away almost daily in favor of Franken, by election officials. All of the vote changes favored Franken, and the changes by election officials int hat one race amounted to more than all of the other races combined.

It stinks.

Here is the WSJ, which you may still not like but which jives totally with my recollection of how Franken's votes kept trickling in.

If you google around a little bit you'll find that all of these charges aren't actually true. But why would anyone bother to find out such information on their own when it's easier to be misled by oped pieces?

 

[jillian]

In this case it looks like shady elections officials padding Franken's tallies.

Dammit, this pisses me off.

200811142596 | Al Franken's Election Numbers Keep Changing, Why? | / | Editorial

I thikn perhaps you need to understand the process. Because you're missing some essential elements in order to say that.

First, the re-count was mandatory because there were only 200 votes between Franken and Coleson.

Second, there are people from BOTH parties present. No one can play around with this. This isn't Florida 2000 with Tom De-Lay's staffers screaming outside the door of the recount area and Katherine Harris isn't secretary of state.

The reason that Franken keeps narrowing the gap is that ballots were probably improperly rejected due to the desire of pollwatchers to not make such decisions on their own, so the ballots are put aside. When they are reviewed and okay'd, they go back into the count. And the absentee ballots are going to fall democrat to a higher percentage than for a republican.

Everyone anticipated that Franken would gain votes in the re-count. Whether he exceeds one vote more than Coleson is another issue, but this isn't surprising and there certainly doesn't seem to be chicanery.

As Ravi pointed out, rely on information, not op-eds.

 

[Annie]

I thikn perhaps you need to understand the process. Because you're missing some essential elements in order to say that.

First, the re-count was mandatory because there were only 200 votes between Franken and Coleson.

Second, there are people from BOTH parties present. No one can play around with this. This isn't Florida 2000 with Tom De-Lay's staffers screaming outside the door of the recount area and Katherine Harris isn't secretary of state.

The reason that Franken keeps narrowing the gap is that ballots were probably improperly rejected due to the desire of pollwatchers to not make such decisions on their own, so the ballots are put aside. When they are reviewed and okay'd, they go back into the count. And the absentee ballots are going to fall democrat to a higher percentage than for a republican.

Everyone anticipated that Franken would gain votes in the re-count. Whether he exceeds one vote more than Coleson is another issue, but this isn't surprising and there certainly doesn't seem to be chicanery.

As Ravi pointed out, rely on information, not op-eds.

In order to 'buy' what you are selling, one must assume that those making 'mistakes' that are going for Franken, only made that one mistake. Interestingly enough, other races are not turning out the changes in votes. Thus few extra votes for Obama and others on the ballot or vice versa for Republican candidates. The only mistakes are in the Senate race. Ballots found in cars, days after the election, suddenly making an appearance.

 

[jillian]

In order to 'buy' what you are selling, one must assume that those making 'mistakes' that are going for Franken, only made that one mistake. Interestingly enough, other races are not turning out the changes in votes. Thus few extra votes for Obama and others on the ballot or vice versa for Republican candidates. The only mistakes are in the Senate race. Ballots found in cars, days after the election, suddenly making an appearance.

I've heard allegations like that... I don't put much stock in it.

Ultimately, I'm not "selling" anything. I was pointing out to Cali that she wasn't well-informed on this subject.

 

[Isolde]

In order to 'buy' what you are selling, one must assume that those making 'mistakes' that are going for Franken, only made that one mistake. Interestingly enough, other races are not turning out the changes in votes. Thus few extra votes for Obama and others on the ballot or vice versa for Republican candidates. The only mistakes are in the Senate race. Ballots found in cars, days after the election, suddenly making an appearance.

There has been a fair amount of analysis on the amended results from election night with 100% reporting to the day that the SOS certified the results.

The amount of change in 3 precincts for one candidate was greater than the total amount of change in all races in all precincts for all other candidates. That is, well, incredible at the very least.

 

[editec]

One can only hope that the outcomes of the elections represent the will of the majority of people.

We can all claim that one side or the other has lied and cheated but since not one of us are really in a position to know, all we're doing when we insist we KNOW the truth is show the board how partisan we are.

 

[Care4all]

Gore took the election to court. In the end the fact it ended up at the Federal level is Gore's fault for taking it to court. The Florida Supreme Cout violated Florida law and ignored the Lower Court ever time. It would never have ended up in the Federal Court system at all except for the fact Gore took it to court in the hopes a Democratic controlled Florida Supreme Court would side with him.

gore DID NOT take the election to court.....YOU are wrong....the Republicans took it to court to STOP the recount first...james Baker took it tothe supreme court for the bush team....

i think you are confused because volusia county and another county, who saw that they would not be finished with their recount by the mandated time, so they sued, or requested for an extension....to finish their recount.....this WAS NOT the Gore campaign, but the two county election supervisors that could see they would not be done with their own recounts by the delegated time.

james baker, the Bush campaign... brought a case to the supreme court to stop the extension, to STOP these counties from finishing their recount.

 

[Lycurgus]

I respect your beliefs and applaud your achievements in life. But your logic

is based solely on your beliefs and can be twisted to fit any viewpoint.

For example Bill Gates once said "The specific elements of Christianity are not

something I'm a huge believer in." In terms of doing things I take a fairly

scientific approach to why things happen and how they happen". I dont

think anyone can argue the business sucess of Bill Gates, but that is not

proof that having faith is wrong. The fact is their are a large number of

of non believers who are succesful figures in our history, Warren Buffet and

Albert Einstein come to mind. Yet I dont consider them to be proof that all

science and no faith is what it takes for success.

LOL ............. Well the point I made was, that my religious views were suited for and worked for me. Further, since they are mine, then yes, they are a part of me, hence involved in all I do. However, they are not permitted to hamper or interfere with my professional life in any negative, thus they end up only being an asset. Get it?

In other words, if I used my business as Palin has been accused of using her office, in terms of her personal religion, then I doubt that our family business could have lasted nearly as long. People do not come to us to have us try to induce them into our personal belief system, they come for a specific service and line of goods.

In other words, it would work the same for the Atheist.

I am still waiting for the documentation on Palin to support any of the claims.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

gore DID NOT take the election to court.....YOU are wrong....the Republicans took it to court to STOP the recount first...james Baker took it tothe supreme court for the bush team....

i think you are confused because volusia county and another county, who saw that they would not be finished with their recount by the mandated time, so they sued, or requested for an extension....to finish their recount.....this WAS NOT the Gore campaign, but the two county election supervisors that could see they would not be done with their own recounts by the delegated time.

james baker, the Bush campaign... brought a case to the supreme court to stop the extension, to STOP these counties from finishing their recount.

You are wrong as usual. Gore took it to court to demand his style of counting. He was rebuffed at the local level and took it to the Florida Supreme Court. In fact Gore sent something like an army of Lawyers to do his bidding. You can lie all you want the truth is the Courts ONLY got involved because GORE took it there. I suggest you do a little more FACT checking before you make stupid statements.

As for the FINAL case, yes the republicans started that one AFTER the Florida Supreme Court violated Florida law and allowed Gore another count after mandatory recounts were done in violation of election laws of the State of Florida, they refused to ensure the recount was fair and honest and uniform through out the recount areas. 7 of 9 Supreme Court Justices AGREED on this basic fact.

 

[Isolde]

LOL ............. Well the point I made was, that my religious views were suited for and worked for me. Further, since they are mine, then yes, they are a part of me, hence involved in all I do. However, they are not permitted to hamper or interfere with my professional life in any negative, thus they end up only being an asset. Get it?

In other words, if I used my business as Palin has been accused of using her office, in terms of her personal religion, then I doubt that our family business could have lasted nearly as long. People do not come to us to have us try to induce them into our personal belief system, they come for a specific service and line of goods.

In other words, it would work the same for the Atheist.

I am still waiting for the documentation on Palin to support any of the claims.

And crickets will chirp. I have found that generally speaking with a few rare exceptions the left don't think they need to provide any factual evidence to support any of their claims.

If they come up with something, my apologies in advance.

 

[Isolde]

One can only hope that the outcomes of the elections represent the will of the majority of people.

We can all claim that one side or the other has lied and cheated but since not one of us are really in a position to know, all we're doing when we insist we KNOW the truth is show the board how partisan we are.

I agree. The killing blow to democracy would be to cast doubt on our election process and the counting of the vote.

 

[Caligirl]

Caligirl, this proves to me that you have not read any of the documentation concerning the pipeline.

You do not seem stupid, ignorant or unable to comprehend.

The woman expressed her personal hope and personal feelings about it's success, gee, slay her for that.

Thankfully, she backed it up with good negotiations and solid documentation and agreements. Though I'm sure that God was in her heart, no one reported her stopping to ask his advice in the middle of the negotiations.

I must wonder after reading your posts in this thread, do you ever decide your stance based on facts or simply personal likes and dislikes?

Please understand, I am trying to understand your motivation, as the documentation doesn't provide any insight.

My motivation is that when something looks like it is is not in the interest of this country I will be vocal about it. I hope you do the same!

Throwing an election whether to Bush in 2000 and 2004 or to Franken in 2008 or to the dozens of other officials that may have gotten into office not by the will of the electorate is not in the best interest of the people.

I do not believe I "slayed palin," you are engaging in a little hyperbole yourself. She is on record in several settings, most recently in post election interviews, stating clearly that her faith is her political compass. That ideaology is inherently dangerous. It is the sort of thing that overthrew the Shah, as one example. The bible is clear to me on this. Render to God what is God's and to Caesar what is Caesar's. I think this is very wise. As a compass for moral decisions, as a compass for informing one's interactions with others in the world, as a compass for determining the mindset with which to live one's life, faith is absolutely indispensable. These are all personal internal issues. (Faith might be a very good reason to make the difficult decision to not claim to have sold a plane on Ebay when you didn't.) But, as a compass for policy, faith is misplaced! Pipelines and education and wars and these sorts of arenas where faith keeps seeming to appear with Bush and Palin and etc are "of this world." There is no moral growth, no personal sacrifice, no following in the footsteps of Jesus by deciding to take a country to war or by deciding that my children's creation beliefs are your responsibilty to instill. Faith is misplaced when it comes to enacting policy.

I am drifting off here.

Palin has decent approval ratings and I am sure she is effective in getting things done, though if we want to talk about her accomplishments it does seem like she made a few decisions that i disagree with. but, the people of Alaska like her well enough, and she is intelligent and all that. She is charismatic. I disagree with her fundamentally, and she seems to me to have an unspoken faith-in-politics agenda. If you thought that Obama had a spoken or unspoken agenda of any sort, then you can understand my feelings. I could say you just don't like him, but politics don't break down simply into fact-based vs like/dislike. Of course many people vote for the candidate they like, but they like them because that candidate is running on issues that matter to the voter. I like that Obama insisted that our soldiers are all equally american. I like that he did the same for workers, for people of all races in this country, and so on. I like that he gets diversity. I think E pluribus unum is a good message. I recognize that he failed to convince a huge 47% of the electorate, so he obviously failed to make the case to almost half of the people that this is the United states of america. But I still think his message was right.

If you want to talk policy, I've stated elsewhere that my main concern is sustainability, not education, health care, or the economy. So if you want to talk about voting for issues not personal like or dislikes, I had to go with Obama there as well. But like i said a minute ago, I don't think you can separate personal likes from issues, as a general rule of thumb, because you are generally going to like the person that has your interest at heart. Might be different for some people.

 

[Isolde]

Timeout Cali, how was the election thrown to Bush in 2004? I missed that one.