What Will Libs Blame Their Loss On?

[Caligirl]

I saw a picture of the women but it didn't say what party they belonged to so I thought you assumed.

Anyways, what do you think now? Did you read what you just replied to? It says:

The court agreed with the plaintiffs and the District Court that Blackwell's directive violated HAVA

Help America Vote Act (HAVA

He violated HAVA!!! PERIOD!!!!! And they plan on doing it again. That's why this time we are ready for them.

I know Blackwell is bad. THe state got rid of him. He ran for governor, the democrats won, they now have a dem sec of state, whose digging is what FINALLY got diebold to admit thet their CODE drops votes in democratic districts.

But I don't know of any convictions, especially at that level. Evidence, tons of it.

 

[MalibuMan]

I can't go to Bradblog at work so look this up:

The BRAD BLOG : Ohio Secretary of State Ends Voting Machine "sleepovers"

So Ken Blackwell was in charge back in 04. Now it's Jennifer Brunner. He was a big time Bush supporter AND in charge of Ohio's election? Sounds like Katherine Harris in 2000.

In 2004 Ohio had sleepovers where election officials would take voting machines home overnight. We know voting machines are hackable. Now one of the steps taken in Ohio is the new secretary of state ends sleepovers. Sounds like something happened in the middle of the election night in Ohio in 2004.

Besides the fact that Bush flew to Ohio in the middle of the night to meet Ken Blackwell. Probably to thank him.

You all should be so proud.

Again. There had to be a Democrat in that election office to approve of such a stupid idea in the first place.

 

[Caligirl]

Maybe, but blackwell is definitely a slimy sleezeball, there's no doubt. It started with him chairing the Ohio reelection campaign for Bush, while holding the SoS office, a defninte conflict of interest, anyone should agree to that!

 

[Silence]

Maybe, but blackwell is definitely a slimy sleezeball, there's no doubt. It started with him chairing the Ohio reelection campaign for Bush, while holding the SoS office, a defninte conflict of interest, anyone should agree to that!

anyone, except a republican that is.

 

[MalibuMan]

anyone, except a republican that is.

I take exception to that.


It is a conflict of interest.

 

[Caligirl]

I knew both sides would agree.

 

[sealybobo]

Again. There had to be a Democrat in that election office to approve of such a stupid idea in the first place.

Oh? Is this another one of those, "everyone shares the blame" things like the subprime fiasco?

 

[MalibuMan]

Oh? Is this another one of those, "everyone shares the blame" things like the subprime fiasco?

Would you let it happen if you were in the Election Ofiice?

 

[MalibuMan]

Maybe, but blackwell is definitely a slimy sleezeball, there's no doubt. It started with him chairing the Ohio reelection campaign for Bush, while holding the SoS office, a defninte conflict of interest, anyone should agree to that!

Well slimy sleezy maybe. Sort of like this.

Where did Obama's money come from? | Sunspot

 

[sealybobo]

I know Blackwell is bad. THe state got rid of him. He ran for governor, the democrats won, they now have a dem sec of state, whose digging is what FINALLY got diebold to admit thet their CODE drops votes in democratic districts.

But I don't know of any convictions, especially at that level. Evidence, tons of it.

Agreed.

I just hate arguing with Republicans who want proof. They argued with us for how many years that Bush didn't lie us into Iraq?

Then they lied about the economy being "strong" until just recently?

Don't forget they denied that Bush politicized the Justice Department and they believed Alberto Gonzales "couldn't recall".

So forgive me if I tend to not believe them on anything.

And it is hard to convict anyone when Bush fired all the good Federal Prosecutors and replaced them with partisan hacks. But again, we don't have PROOF that's what he did, but all the facts lead us to that conclusion.

On that note, NPR interviewed David Iglesias, one of those Republican Prosecutors that Bush fired because he wouldn't do Bush's political bidding.

'In Justice': David Iglesias On U.S. Attorney Firings
Listen Now [19 min 50 sec] add to playlist

Fresh Air from WHYY, October 8, 2008 · The controversial U.S. attorney firings of 2006 were of a partisan political nature — that's the conclusion reached recently in an internal Justice Department investigation.

That's a vindication for David Iglesias, one of the attorneys whose firings caused a scandal that eventually led to the resignation of then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Iglesias has long said he was fired from his U.S. attorney post in New Mexico because he refused to bow to pressure from Republican members of Congress, who wanted him to speed up a politically sensitive investigation involving Democratic legislators.

Iglesias has written an insider's account of the affair; it's titled In Justice: Inside the Scandal That Rocked the Bush Administration.

'In Justice': David Iglesias On U.S. Attorney Firings : NPR

 

[sealybobo]

Would you let it happen if you were in the Election Ofiice?

I would not.

 

[AllieBaba]

The economy was fine until the libtards wrecked it.

The bail out is helping us out nicely, I see.

 

[sealybobo]

The economy was fine until the libtards wrecked it.

The bail out is helping us out nicely, I see.

Your body was fine before time wrecked it too.

Just playin. Where you been all day babe?

 

[AllieBaba]

Waiting for you so I could TROUNCE your sorry ass.

 

[sealybobo]

Again. There had to be a Democrat in that election office to approve of such a stupid idea in the first place.

NYT: States' purges of voter rolls appear illegal - The New York Times - MSNBC.com

Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law, according to a review of state records and Social Security data by The New York Times.
Some states allow such voters to cast provisional ballots. But they are often not counted because they require added verification.
States have been trying to follow the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and remove the names of voters who should no longer be listed; but for every voter added to the rolls in the past two months in some states, election officials have removed two, a review of the records shows.
The six states seem to be in violation of federal law in two ways. Some are removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election, which is not allowed except when voters die, notify the authorities that they have moved out of state, or have been declared unfit to vote.
Some of the states are improperly using Social Security data to verify registration applications for new voters.
In addition to the six swing states, three more states appear to be violating federal law. Alabama and Georgia seem to be improperly using Social Security information to screen registration applications from new voters. And Louisiana appears to have removed thousands of voters after the federal deadline for taking such action.
In the year ending Sept. 30, election officials in Nevada, for example, used the Social Security database more than 740,000 times to check voter files or registration applications and found more than 715,000 nonmatches, federal records show. Election officials in Georgia ran more than 1.9 million checks on voter files or voter registration applications and found more than 260,000 nonmatches.