Vote Fraud Allegations Gathers Steam

[Merlin1047]

As a newbie, I will aquaint myself with search and a few other aspects of reading and posting.....I get distracted. I actually enjoy myself here.....maybe I've become sadistic..... I am often really surprised at what I read. I'm working to be considered a thoughtful and respected "member of the board".

Well, you're tolerable - for a leftie. :teeth: :tng: And if you're hanging out here you're not sadistic - you're masochistic.

But seriously, I'm fairly new here myself but I must say that CivilLiberty has been impressive. He's gone from zero to jackass in a single thread.

Here's the reason that I, and I suspect several others, do not treat his comments seriously:
1. He is here on false pretenses. His opening salvo was a cheap attempt to hype his blog. He has repeated these attempts throughout numerous posts in several threads. (I have taken a certain sadistic delight in removing them)

2. We've been treated to a virtually endless parade of conspiracy theorists. Although CL is able to dress his arguments in more credible prose than most, he is certainly a member of the tinfoil hat brigade.

3. He is a bullshit artist. He starts the thread on one premise then when that is no longer convenient, he switches to another specious tact about "research". You betcha. Research. Right.

4. He is not here to present a view and discuss it. He is a smug, elitist, pseudo-intellectual diletante who is here to dispense his wisdom to all the "little people".

5. On a more personal note - his whole attitude just pisses me off. I refuse to discuss issues with him because that is the trap in which he seeks to snare the unwary participant. I won't play the game on his turf or by his rules. One could cite proof, do research and present linked information until your fingers bleed and still make no progress with CL. Consider the fact that he comes in with nothing to back him other than an obscure study which raises a question regarding the disparity between exit polls and the final vote count. Apparently it never occurred to him that libs have made a science out of skewing polls throughout this election. THAT has been well documented. But rather than get bogged down with specifics which he would simply dismiss out of hand, I choose to go beyond the facade and attack the persona behind it because to me, that is the real issue in this case. That, and it gives me a little personal satisfaction to see him puff up like a blowfish.

 

[CivilLiberty]

What I do see so far as fraudulent is your claim to be conservative. I have yet to see any supporting evidence of it at all thus far in your posts!

Well, we have not discussed any of my policy views to any real extent - this all started with some observations about election anomalies.

One thing I find interesting are the many of attacks as a result of that post. I've been waiting all day for someone to state the very obvious:

Every election has anomolies and even evidence of possible fraud, if you look hard enough. With a nation the size of ours, it's inconceivable that there would not be any fraud, or no anomolies. The question then is the extent.

I've never made any claims that any possible fraud may change the outcome of this election - but that does not mean that investigating fraud is irrelevant - it's still important to ensure continued faith in our election system.

ON BEING CONSERVATIVE:


A few of my positional statements:

1) I am a fiscal conservative, and I believe that government should be run with this in mind. Record deficits and spiraling the public debt past 7 trillion is not fiscally conservative.

2) I oppose affirmative action polices that mandate quotas or provide artificial barriers to any majority group or grant additional rights to any specific minority group. Equal rights under the law.

3) I oppose socialized handouts to able-bodied individuals just because they want to spend the day drunk, and not work. Not on my tax dollar. Such handouts actually enable the self destructive behavior and is thus immoral to the extreme.

4) Citizens have a right to arm themselves, as specified in the Bill of Rights. Impediments to the bearing or arms by citizens in good standing cannot be tolerated.

5) The government has no place in one's house of worship; likewise, religious doctrine has no place in government.

6) Government should be small, with minimal intrusion on society.

7) Tax dollars should be thought of as an investment in a stonger society - and as the investors, we have a right to demand a return on that investment. Squandering tax dollars on interest for the national debt, misguided social programs that create more problems than they solve, misguided military actions, or the expansion of government intrusions into our homes and daily lives, cannot be tolerated.




Regards,


Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

just a GRIP as the say out there in holly-weird..

No, I'm not a grip - I'm an editor. you wouldn't even know what a "grip" means.

I just love it when you people fling these ad hominems - why not go out on a limb and actually challenge a specific point? Chicken?

Regards,

Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

You sure do know an awful lot about how the left "views" and "feels" to be a "conservative".
I don't know any conservatives that can understand liberals that much.

As you may have noticed, I live in Hollywood. It's far left out here, as it is in New York. I mostly hear liberal or progressive views - I rarely hear pure right points of view, that's why I find this forum so interesting.


Regards


Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

so you're still gonna persue the fraud issue, huh?

I wasn't "pursuing" it - As I pointed out in the beginning of the article, I dismissed most of the claims, but thought it interesting to take at least a cursory look at a few of the anomalies.


A

 

[CivilLiberty]

Insecure???-Interesting--maybe the red and blue doesn't represent the smart and dumb but the secure a and insecure.---Look into that for me will ya?

It's easy for a red stater to feel "secure" the terrorists aren't coming anywhere near your vacuous tracts of land. Terrorists, to inflict terror, target the population centers, particularly those in the blue states.

I work for a major studio here in H'wood - and we've been the "target" of terrorist threats since 9/11. We've been locked down 24/7 since, with airport style security at every entrance. Do you have to go through airport style security at YOUR work? No?

Don't even begin to tell me about security.


Regards


Andy

 

[Merlin1047]

I work for a major studio here in H'wood - and we've been the "target" of terrorist threats since 9/11. We've been locked down 24/7 since, with airport style security at every entrance. Do you have to go through airport style security at YOUR work? No?

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

Wowee. You learn something every day. I never knew that a leftwing bullshit factory would be a high-value target for terrorists.

Keep your head down, Spanky. Wouldn't want those nasty terrorists flying an ultra-light into your building.

 

[CivilLiberty]

Excuses? They're reasons! You're making wild claims and we're supposed to except, people there gave good reasons and you're calling them excuses.

They aren't even the reason the president gave - they are excuses.

No, a hypocrite would be slinging all the mud at Clinton and then get pissed when it's done to Bush. I didn't support Clinton and I never spread lies about him either. What the left has done in these past (at least) 3 years is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. I had never seen any kind of group totally lose their minds and act the way those have done. It's ridiculous!

You see, this is precisely what I find most interesting about this board.

You can take this statement, exactly as stated, but change the names of the presidents, and switch "left" with "right" as so:

"No, a hypocrite would be slinging all the mud at Bush Sr. and then get pissed when it's done to Clinton. I didn't support Bush Sr. and I never spread lies about him either. What the right has done in these past (at least) 3 years is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. I had never seen any kind of group totally lose their minds and act the way those have done. It's ridiculous!"


And there you have a statement that would easily come from the mouth of a blue stater.


to wit, and what I find fascinating: The red staters on this board are accusing the blue staters of EXACLY THE SAME THING. It's amazing.

So sad!!

No, I'm happy - happy believing in the truth - not some ancient superstitious fairy-tale.


Best regards, and if I may say, thank you for the discourse and restraint from the ad hominems that seem so common from some here.


Andy

 

[jimnyc]

I just love it when you people fling these ad hominems - why not go out on a limb and actually challenge a specific point? Chicken?

That's odd. I replied to each and every of your statements in numbered order. I replied with some of my own asking the same of you in return. You never replied.

 

[musicman]

It's easy for a red stater to feel "secure" the terrorists aren't coming anywhere near your vacuous tracts of land. Terrorists, to inflict terror, target the population centers, particularly those in the blue states.

I work for a major studio here in H'wood - and we've been the "target" of terrorist threats since 9/11. We've been locked down 24/7 since, with airport style security at every entrance. Do you have to go through airport style security at YOUR work? No?

Don't even begin to tell me about security.


Regards


Andy

The hell I don't! I know how thinking must upset your prejudices, Andy, but do consider that when you're on a message board, you have no idea who you're talking to. One of the gigs on my circuit is a hotel/casino complex, and I'll put the rigamarole I have to go through to get into that place against ANYTHING you endure.

"Vacuous tracts of land", are they? Perhaps the reason you are so puzzled by, and out of touch with red-staters is that you bring your contempt of us into your every thought. You might be able to see us better if you wiped some of the condescension off your glasses.

 

[UsaPride]

And there you have a statement that would easily come from the mouth of a blue stater.

No you can't because then it would be untrue. Oh, well, out of the mouth of a blue stater, the fact that it's a lie wouldn't matter so I guess you're right. It could easily come from the mouth of a blue stater.

No, I'm happy - happy believing in the truth - not some ancient superstitious fairy-tale.

You don't seem very happy.

 

[CivilLiberty]

Hahaha.

Glad you got the joke.

1.) Do you really think Kim is stupid enough to launch a nuclear missile against the continental United States?

No.

I consider it as unlikely as the former USSR launching a preemptive attack during the cold war, yet that fear fueled our nation's military industrial complex. (I'm not saying this was bad, just that it was the situation).

But that's not the point - the point is Iraq was NOT a credible threat, particularly in comparison to Kim Jong II.

2.) Do you support the development and construction of anti-ballisitic missile platforms?

Yes, provided they WORK. Let me be clear - I support a STRONG, well funded military. We need the biggest stick on the playground.

We also need a leader with the wisdom to know when it's appropriate to use that stick, and when it isn't.

For instance in Afghanistan, why didn't we use the full force of our military? why did we outsource aspects of that mission to feudal warlords? I wasn't there, and we my never know, but I believe these are questions that should be answered.



Regards,


Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

You have such a high IQ and such an impressive resume and you think praying is soleley for Christians? How pathetic.

I don't pray - I meditate.



"Prayer" has a colloquial connotation associated closely with the Abrahamic religions, though a few others may use the term as well. "Prayer" is typically associated with the Abrahamic god. (The god Christians, Jews and Muslims follow).


Regards,


Andy

 

[Zhukov]

No.

Then why can't you sleep at night? You're afraid of improbabilities?

But that's not the point - the point is Iraq was NOT a credible threat

"It was reasonable to conclude that Iraq posed an imminent threat. What we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war,"
-Dr. Kay, weapons inspector for coalition forces
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KAY401A.html

For instance in Afghanistan, why didn't we use the full force of our military? why did we outsource aspects of that mission to feudal warlords?

We used that force our military commanders deemed necessary. Whether or not you agree with that estimation is hardly relevant. In every large amalgamation of native forces CIA operatives and Special Forces were there to direct manoeuvre and assist with information and airstrikes.

So in your opinion we should have perhaps driven the 1st and 3d AD in there? That worked real well for the Soviets.

Once again I feel the need to remind you that your opinion is just that.

 

[CivilLiberty]

Even so,pollsters are human.

Indeed - and this accounts for a certain level of bias in any polling situation.

I even saw news reports that some polls consistently go one way ot the other.Most had the two in a neck and neck race,but some always showed Kerry the winner. That to me says there is interference of bias.

That is only one of several possible explanations.

You will see that it's 5 minutes,not 7

Who cares? On the morning of 9/11 I woke to my clock radio. Hearing the sounds of sirens and screams, I at first thought it was a promo for some Jerry Bruckheimer movie. Then the announced described the situation. I LEPT out of bed, and turned on the TV, and logged onto the internet. On seeing the devastation, I began calling people I knew with connection to New York - my girlfriend at the time, for instance is from NYC, and her father works in a hospital there, near the WTC.

I did these things as soon as I heard the news. I didn't lie in bed for 5 minutes wishing it would go away. And I'm not even president. He didn't seem to care. He sat there in a clueless daze. 7 minutes, 5 minutes - who cares. Longer than 30 seconds is way too long.

You can imagine all the nifty little excuses you want - but if that were Clinton, and HE waited there over a minute, you'd skewer him, and you know it.

As far as Fox news goes,how can you believe they are so right wing?

You *must* be joking.

Is it just because their owner is a right winger? Do they not always have BOTH sides? As far as their programing. They have Bill O'Reilly-Independent.Hannity and Colmes-Dem and Rep,Gretta-well,she's just Gretta Van Peterson anymore(Scott Peterson that is). I think it's a fair line up. To say Fox news isn't fair,well that's like saying CNN is fair!!

Bill O'Reilly an Independent? Hahaha hohoho hehehehe

Oh Oh Oh - I'm in PAIN!

haoahaoahaoaha

And if you call "Colmes" their idea of a "balanced" liberal - jeeez. that guy is a WUSS. And of course the cast a wuss into that slot - to make Hannity's bile seem reasonable!


Andy

 

[rtwngAvngr]

7) Tax dollars should be thought of as an investment in a stonger society - and as the investors, we have a right to demand a return on that investment.

This gem is how I know right now you're just another fake conservative. You're really a lib.

 

[CivilLiberty]

Ok. CivilLiberty. You've been gallivanting around here like an ape drunk on Robitussin, insulting, and belitlling us. Well, the buck stops now.

Ohhh - I'm shakin' in my boots I tell ya!

I'll give you all the bullet points you need for your alleged article.

You mentioned in a post that you're suprised about our "isolation" from liberals here. This is due to us beating them senseless with their own vacuous, mind-numbed, "Blue-state" arguments. They can't take the heat for too long.

At least not the ones that stumble on your little red state part of the internet.

Answer me a couple sensible questions, BlueStateAndy (BSA),

Do you believe Jihadist islam is a threat to the western world?

Yes, specifically Shites. I also think that zionist jews and fundamentalist xtians - in fact most fundamentalist religious groups - are a threat.

Fundamentalists are a threat because they use their religious doctrine as a shield to perpetrate their hatred.

Do you believe the UN nations being bribed by Saddam had their their votes in the security council affected by this illicit income?

Not a specific area I've researched - I'd love to hear your theories on who has been bribed, and by how much.

Do you believe CBS's willingness to run forged documents during an election but unwillingess to diclose the results of the investigation into the forgeries for fear of affecting the election indicates consistency or negligent/ borderline criminal professional misconduct?

I've lost all respect for CBS news over the years. Rather needs a rubber room.


Regards,


Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

Insecurity combined with latent hatred/fear of Christianity. I give you the modern secular atheist.

No, not insecurity - the context that statement ("I'll pray for you") was given was a put down, and I chose to react to that putdown.

Perhaps, in retrospect, I might have clarified my reasoning there.


Andy

 

[Zhukov]

7 minutes, 5 minutes - who cares. Longer than 30 seconds is way too long.

If he had jumped up, leapt out the window, flown to New York, put out the flames with his ice breath and then held up the buildings until everyone was clear, would you have been happy then?

What precisely would you have liked him to do?

You just wished he had gotten up within thirty seconds?

Why? What was he going to do? Get on the plane five minutes earlier?

 

[UsaPride]

No, not insecurity - the context that statement ("I'll pray for you") was given was a put down, and I chose to react to that putdown.

I wasn't putting you down. I truely do feel bad for you. You are a very angry person and that bothered me. I'm sorry if you don't like Prayers, but I had already Prayed before you responded.
I do Pray for anyone that I feel needs it. I don't joke about that!