Renowned journalist Bob Woodward predicts Dick Cheney will be the Republican Party’s presidential nominee in 2008 and that the vice president could face Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton in a dramatic partisan showdown.
Speaking in the Paepcke Auditorium as part of the Aspen Institute’s McCloskey Speaker Series, Woodward on Tuesday listed a number of reasons it is “highly likely” President Bush might implore Cheney to seek the Oval Office.
“He would be 67 if he ran and was elected. Reagan was 69. Republicans always like the old warhorse. … Nixon was 68 […] Both parties like to nominate vice presidents. … Cheney would do it, and I think it’s highly likely, so stay tuned.”
I echo the sentiments of Armando on Daily Kos: “God, please let it be true.”
Sure, I know some of you are thinking the Republicans couldn’t actually be so stupid as to put up Cheney as the nominee, but I would look at it as more an act of arrogance than stupidity. They might actually believe they could put up anybody and win. (Hmm. They may be right. But Republican efforts to fix elections is a subject for another post.)
I also think that a Cheney or Jeb Bush nomination would be a clear indication of how those in power need to maintain a tight control on power, so that the crimes they’ve committed are never allowed to come to light. You know, a President McCain might actually tattle on them.
As a moderate myself, I’d definitely like to se McCain. While I haven’t probed deeply to see how he stands on various issues, he has a rather common sense approach, siding with whoever makes more sense.
Voted for McCain in the 2000 primaries, before the parties made it clear they don’t want to risk people actually choosing their candidates…
*cough* Anyways, theres always a place for a straight-shooting politician (so to speak), over some party-line hack. Sadly the crowd in control of the GOP right now won’t let go easily~ The party has to take a serious political drubbing first, I think…
The guy’s got a seriously bad ticker.
Pay close attention to his running mate. Who’s the neocons’ biggest champion in Congress?
Whatever happens, happens. I just hope the Dems. aren’t the usual morons and run some skank like Hillary for Pres. God help us all.
I think this is idle speculation on Woodward’s part, as you would think that if Cheney was seriously considering a 2008 run we would have been hearing way more at this point. If nothing else, we’d be hearing more public speaking/annoucements out of him staking out positions.
That said, they may be waiting to see how the 2006 elections go before making any firm decisions, but I just don’t see Cheney running. Don’t forget, there was a lot of speculation that Cheney wouldn’t serve out the first term to let the President get somebody “more popular” for the 2004 election, but that didn’t happen either. We will see.
Cheney was in charge of selecting the VP for GW in 2000. If he is tapped to help select the candidate for 2008 he may determine he is again the best candidate. Not likely though, as his ticker is weak and he keeps talking about finally retiring.
My vote goes for whomever, if the winner, would remind the left wing of GW. The tizzy fits for another 4-8 years would be worth their weight in gold. How about Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gingrich, or dare I say it, Karl Rove.
you’ll probably get your wish, Wonder… Its pretty much par for the course for those guys.
Someone in the Rep. Party needs to regain control before they wreck it all the way!
Windie @ 7 –
I agree. I’d love to see someone practical. While I tend to favor more GOP issues than Democrat issues, I’m sickened by some of the moral-pushing conservative values which contradict the ‘small government’ and ‘state control’ verbage they typically proclaim to support.
I’m sure in a year thta Cheney will come forward, anounced that the president asked him to head the search for the Republican most capable of continuing the Struggle Against Violent Extremism, and that after much searching, he is the only one that can do it.
I would seriously consider voting for Gulliani or McCain (I voted for McCain in the ’00 primary), but there is no way the GOP, with its current base, will support either of these for president. Heck, Gulliani is pro-choice and has gays as friends. Plus his marital problems make Hillary into the Family Values candidate. Its a shame, because either would be able to actually unite the country by taking the social issues off the table and providing leadership.
And, outside of the pro-choice liberal Republicans that can’t get through the primaries, the GOP bench is surprisingly weak. That is why you are hearing all this Cheney for President talk. In the end, I can’t beleive that the GOP would be so kind to the Dems. No one trusts Bush or his handling of the war or economy, but they think he is a good guy. Cheney, they don’t even think that he is a good guy.
I’ve always thought that Hillary is more a favorite of the Sean Hannity’s of the world than of anyone else, although she at least will get a hearing from the rank and file. I also think Gore could pull a Nixon like resurection; although I’m split on that. Just remember that with the Dems, the front runner almost always goes down.
They may very well put up Cheney because they have no fear of losing the election. They are in control of the counting of the votes. Those who control the counting of the votes decide the outcome of the election. Once again, I implore all of you, and the rest of America, to take seriously the threat imposed by computerized voting machines (DREs & Optical scanners). Do some reading on the subject. Read Black Box Voting by Bev Harris (the book is downloadable for free on her website, http://www.blackboxvoting.org). Read the book “Did George W. Bush Steal America’s 2004 Election?” (it can be purchased at http://www.freepress.org) It contains all the essential documents includng statistical analysis, the electoral challenge, Rep John Conyer’s report, court documents. etc. relating to the Ohio election. Go out to http://www.solarbus.org and get their free CD that contains relevant video. Read http://www.bradblog.com. This blog focuses heavily on election fraud issues, including the GOP voting rights front group AVCR and the rigged Baker Election Commission (on which the mainstream corporate press never bothered to report). Regarding the recent report by the AVCR which states that it was the Democrats and not the GOP that engaged in massive vote fraud and suppression tactics, I refer you to today’s edition of SFGate.com which has an article on GOP voter suppression tactics, “Despite a zero-tolerance policy on tampering with voters, the Republican Party has quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide private defense lawyers for a former Bush campaign official charged with conspiring to keep Democrats from voting in New Hampshire.”
Democrat’s will remain out of power so long as we continue to use, and increase the use of, computerized voting machines.
10
You’ve opened a can of worms here that will most likely provoke a string of posts by Repubs. calling foul on the WA gubernatorial election.
That issue notwithstanding, I do feel your fears on computerized voting sans paper trail is really troublesome.
raincity calling @ 10
‘..Those who control the counting of the votes decide the outcome of the election.’
Finally, a sane assessment of the KC elections and the 2004 Governor’s race.
Cheney has more chance than Gregoire in 2008.
Goldy,
I have to disagree with the ending of your post. While I have a lot of admiration for John McCain, and I could stomach him as my president, he’s not going to expose any of Bush’s wrongdoings. McCain is a great American, but he does tow party line.
Look how Bush led McCain around by the nose on the campaign trail in 2004 and even used him as his whoopin’ boy for SS reform this year.
Nah, I like McCain, but he’s too party loyal. Plus, if he did actually tell the truth about the Bush presidency, you know some whacko from the NRA would pull a Lee Harvey Oswald on him.
Woodward is just trying to give Helen Thomas a heart attack. ;)
GBS:
Don’t underestimate how much McCain holds a grudge against Bush for what the Bush campaign did to him in South Carolina. He knows he has to back Bush now to keep the base in line, but once he is past the primaries, he has nothing to loose, and plenty of time to get back at Bush and to show his independence by sweeping away all of the corruption. He might not do it, but I think he would love the chance to get a little revenge.
Dr. E @ 11
I’ve come to really admire the depth and breadth of your knowledge and well articulated, logical positions in your posts.
I’m curious as to why you’d be in favor of computerized voting if there were a paper trail. Don’t you think that any fraudulent vote cast would generate an equally fraudulent piece of paper?
I guess I’m slightly, dare I say cynical, that if someone is going to go the great length of sabotaging the software, wouldn’t they be able to create a false paper document?
It just seems that a piece of paper would lull us into a false sense of security. In the end, I guess no matter what there has to be leap of faith that the system works even if we’re using paper ballots.
JDB @ 16
While I hope you are correct, and I think McCain would enjoy some back back, he won’t do it. The main reason I believe McCain wouldn’t expose Bush is that ultimately an admission of that magnitude would destroy the Republican party.
For that reason alone, he won’t do the right thing.
Ammend my post @ 18.
I meant to say McCain won’t to the honorable thing. Of course he’s going to do the “right” thing and provide cover for Bush and Cheney.
GBS @ 17
Serious question… Why not go after ALL voting fraud? Why not close all the gaps? You speculate about software sabotage theories while all sorts of issues like hanging chads, “enhanced” ballots, false registrations, etc. all truly exist.
This isn’t to rehash KingCo or Ohio or Florida or anywhere else in particular.
What about Colin Powell? Can’t he win in a walk?
Where’s the guy with the dual pesonality, Roger Rabbit/Harry Poon?
GBS @ 18:
You could be right. It depends on how much resentment he has for the Kumbaya Republicans. I think the model is Teddy Roosevelt, where he gets in office and drags his party into the center by exposing the corruption of the right. But this is just a guess on my part. Any one who runs for president has to make a lot of deals to get there.
GBS @ 17:
With a paper trail, you get to see that the machine recorded the votes you voted (If I vote for Gregoire, the paper ballot shows a vote for Gregoire. I know from my sister this is how the computer ballots in NJ work…, think of it like the receipt from a ATM). If the paper ballots do not add up to the computer count, you know there is a serious problem. It provides a good check and balance. I only favor computer ballots if there is a paper trail that allows for an audit.
is this harry poon/roger rabbit thing “horsesass Talking points”?
I’d vote for a reformist Cheney in 2008 in a second, if he ran on cleaning up politics (starting at home). A refreshed, not insanely corrupt Right would be healthy for the US.
raincity@10 said….”They may very well put up Cheney because they have no fear of losing the election. They are in control of the counting of the votes. Those who control the counting of the votes decide the outcome of the election.”
hey no kidding…ya think? only i’m thinking about the democrats in king county.rigging elections has never been a GOP trait. and cheney has a bad heart…he won’t run.
mccain is just a bitter little man…a contrarian. he would make a worse president than hillary.
how about condi rice????
As long as Dems nominate Her Highness ANYBODY can beat her. Right thinkin’ people will come out of the woodwork to vote against her.
With the WA recount we had a transparent recount. With computerized voting, all counting is conducted in secret, in a black box with no citizen observers. That is the issue; transparency. Lack of transparency creates situations ripe for fraud. Regarding the security of paper ballots, they only add security if they are actually hand counted. Since most states only provide for hand counts in the event of a very close race, there is no real protection merely by the existence of a paper ballot. Mandatory random audits are a step in the right direction, but with computerized voting such audits are not the cure all. Like a crooked bookkeeper, the programmer (or hacker) can create a double set of books. If the software keeps a duplicate set of records and uses the first set for the totals and the second set for the real numbers, you can rig the totals but keep the detail intact in case of spot checks. Hence, the mere existence of paper ballots, even with random audits, is not sufficient.This is why moving to all mail in ballots is not sufficient because these ballots are read on optical scanners which could easily have two sets of books. Elections need to be transparent. Computerized voting removes transparency and adds too much complexity to the mix. The simpler and more transparent the system, the less opporunity there is for widespread fraud.
Comment on 6
“My vote goes for whomever, if the winner, would remind the left wing of GW. The tizzy fits for another 4-8 years would be worth their weight in gold. How about Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gingrich, or dare I say it, Karl Rove.”
Look no further than this idiotic post for the explanation of how the country got into the goddam mess it’s in. Too many young white males think with their gonads instead of their brains. Maybe we need to neuter them all.
I don’t think Cheney will run. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment (it doesn’t take longer than that). The guy’s got a bad heart and may drop dead soon. If you could choose between spending your final days in meetings at the office, or with your grandkids under the Wyoming skies, which would you choose?
Nah. The guy doesn’t want it. If nominated, he will not accept; if elected, he will not serve.
I think it’s hilarious that minnow’s home address is posted on his own fucking web site!!!
okay roger…you are a girl aren’t you? cause no guy would ever suggest that males be neutered…they flinch if you even tease them about it.LOL. :)
raincity..transparent recount??? stop looking up when it rains…you could drown that way. but i totally agree with you on the machines…i want a paper trail so the dean logans of the world can’t play games like he did.
Cheney will not run…
This is a Woodward gasbag moment to draw attention to himself.
Isn’t Woodward also pushing another book??
Santorum/Rice….write it down.
Can’t wait for the GOP to put Powell and/or Rice on the ticket. It will be mere SECONDS before the Lefties first use the term “Uncle Tom” and further splinter the minority vote that they SO take for granted.
Jumping in…
I’m curious as to why you’d be in favor of computerized voting if there were a paper trail. Don’t you think that any fraudulent vote cast would generate an equally fraudulent piece of paper?
I favour voting machines as an easily accessible interface for marking paper ballots. You use the machine, it generates a ballot that allows you to verify your votes. You then put that in the ballot box.
The machine counts are only used for quick unofficial results on election night with a count of the paper ballots being the official binding result.
The machine can fraudulently record whatever it wants as long as it spits out a piece of paper with the correct votes.
Powell and Rice are far too damadged by the lies they told in the lead up to Iraq Disaster.
Lordy, I hope the Dems don’t put Hillary on the ballot. She is far too damadged by the first Clinton administration.
But, come what may, if cheney or any of these Neo-Con assholes are on the right side of the ballot, they are not getting a vote from me, unless it is for a conviction.
Isn’t it interesting that GWB spent the morning of the 2004 elections in Colombus, OH.
Interesting coincidence that Wally O’Dell, the CEO of Diebold, who is on the record for having stated that he is “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President” in 2004, lives there.
While Cheney is old and has a bad ticker, he knows where all the bodies are burried. Better to be president with a bad heart than to spend your dying days in court and locked up with some old mob bosses when the truth comes out. That being said, I don’t think he will do it
Cynical:
Santorum? He is loosing bad in PA, has a paper trail that makes even right wingers wince, and has no charisma. Heck, I’ll take him over Cheney. I think Howard Dean on a five week bender could beat Santorum.
You can see they are prepping the news with how good Cheney’s heart is these days:
Saturday, July 9, 2005
WASHINGTON – Vice President Dick Cheney got good news Friday during his annual heart checkup, with a pacemaker detecting no irregular heartbeat, his office said.
Cheney has had four heart attacks, and a pacemaker was placed in his chest in June 2001. The checkup determined that the pacemaker, called an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, was working fine and never had to be activated. The device is designed to activate automatically if needed to regulate the patient’s heartbeat.
Cheney underwent the routine exam at George Washington University Medical Center.
In the afternoon, the vice president went to the British ambassador’s residence, located next to his home on the Naval Observatory compound, and signed a condolence book for victims of the London bus and subway bombings.
From:
http://www.bergen.com/page.php.....VlRUV5eTk=
Roger Rabbit @ 28
‘….Maybe we need to neuter them all.’
Silly wabbit. Most people in the country think the country is running pretty good. Do not take offense that so many of them are pleasured to watch the HA’s and Michael Moores out there self-destruct in public.
Aexia @ 34
‘The machine can fraudulently record whatever it wants as long as it spits out a piece of paper with the correct votes.’
The easy part is coming up with a machine that has all of the needed features such as paper receipts, etc. What we really need is a machine that gets rid of all those ballots that do not have voters.
Nixon wasn’t 68 when he was elected President in 1968. He was 55
http://www.whitehouse.gov/hist...../rn37.html
Woodward might have meant to say “Nixon in ’68”. But who am I to question the real journalists and their army of error-preventing editors.
Stefan @ 41–
HEYYYYY! These LEFTIST PINHEADS are allergic to facts. In fact, they avoid SP because you are way too fact-oriented. The LEFTIST PINHEADS are much more comfortable here at HA….a fact-free zone!
@40
So, since there may be difficulty correcting one problem, we shouldn’t fix another?
Quit linking unrelated things.
Yeah, that Woodward! What an ijit!
Aside from the fact that he took the lead in exposing the Watergate crooks, what else do you have against him?
Hey, speaking of facts, did you know that Karl Rove was the chairman of the College Republicans in 1972 — during the famed era of ‘dirty tricks’ during which CRP trained 50000 college students to criminally interfere with Democratic election campaigns?
If Dems were serious about winning president, they would nominate Lieberman. He could win easily. I’ve never voted dem in my life, but I’d consider him.
McCain would lose by 40 points. Conservatives are SAFT of RINOs and dem base would never vote R.
Speaking of facts, am I wrong that Bush travelled to Columbus, OH on election day 2004? Is that a fact, or not?
What about Evan Bayh?
Mark @ 20
Good afternoon.
Of course I want to eliminate all fraud. All I want is what you want, that the true will of the people prevail to elect the persons who will govern us in a free and fair election.
If it’s truly fraud, I want to eliminate it and prosecute those responsible.
Stuffing ballot box = fraud.
Felon voters = fraud.
Suppression of voters = fraud.
Intimidation of voters = fraud.
Hanging chad = no fraud.
Human error = no fraud.
WA state elections = no fraud.
When the president of Diebold Corp, the one that makes the voting machines used in Florida and Ohio, promises that his voting machines will “deliver the electoral college votes to George W. Bush” before the elections; well let’s just say that’s a teeny, tiny bit suspicious.
The reason for the software sabotage theory is just that I find it funny that people will feel comfortable getting a piece of paper that says they voted for Bush, it might even match what your choice of candidate says on your screen, but when the final tally goes into the black box, who the hell knows for sure who gets credit for the vote. But I guess that’s true of all optical scanners and such. Which is why I said we have to have a leap of faith in the system.
After all, your vote is the only truly the power of democracy.
Lieberman is a tool. I wouldn’t vote for McCain either but I can at least respect him. He knows what he’s doing.
Aexia @ 34
Sounds like a good idea. You could actually take that one step further…
You push the various buttons on the screen and a “SUBMIT” button. You are also asked for a random four-digit PIN. That generates three things:
1.) An electronic recording for “preliminary tally” purposes that CANNOT be accessed until after the polls close.
2.) A coded (date, time, machine, PIN#) heavy-stock ballot with your votes.
3.) A receipt with your votes and the same coding as #2.
The heavy-stock ballots would be counted just like they are right now — optical machine with a hand recount. However, you would also be able to look up your vote online or in an auotmated phone system based on the coding from your receipt. The PIN would be printed on your receipt because the point isn’t really to be secret, but to make it much harder for other people to punch up the date/time/machine and see how you voted.
mark@49
thats a really great idea… I hope we see machines like that some day.
Roger Rabbit @ 30.
I’m going to be riding my Harley after work today around the Greenlake area. If you’re going to be hopping about doing bunny things be sure to wave to all the bikers, if I see you I’ll wave back. But, I’m not going north of the zoo.
I wonder who else I might see today. . .hmmmmmmm.
I expect Cheney to resign before his term is up. The Republican power cabal could then appoint GW’s heir by sticking someone more electable than Cheney in the vice presidency. The Republicans much prefer monarchical succession as a means of choosing their leaders than to permit democracy to function.
nowonder @ 39
Most people think the country is running pretty good? Think again (or for the first time if need be)
< a href="http://www.pollingreport.com/right.htm">Dare you to find one majority “right track” poll result in this list
torridjoe @ 53
With your tunnel vision and worship of polls you should notice that based on the linked polls GW should have lost big time in both 2000 and 2004. Nice try though.
nowonder @53
I have no idea what you’re referring to; I was responding to your false assertion that most people think the country is running pretty good. Most think we’re going in the wrong direction, by a healthy margin. Nice try at deflecting from your error, though.
TJ @ 53.
I agree with you that things aren’t going as well as they could be, and certainly not as good as when President Clinton was running the show.
And not to throw cold water on your parade, but I’m going to have to agree with NoWonder on this one: the only poll that matters is the one taken in the month November every other year.
In order to have any real chance at winning in the WH in 2008 we’ll need to pick up a couple of seats in either the house or the senate. If we pick up seats in both bodies of congress then we’ve got a great chance, and if we pick up a significant number of seats then it’s almost certain we’d win in 2008. If we lose seats in the house, not so good, if we loose seats in the senate, real bad, if we lose seats in both and lose the super majority in the senate. . . excuse me I just had to blow chunks over the thought of losing my civil liberties.
Until then the only good thing the polls do is give the RNC an opportunity to craft messages for their noise machine to counter the truth.
I hope Woodward is correct about Hillary. No matter who she ran against, she would only get the left wing extremist, and radical feminist votes. In the process of losing by 30+ %, she would drag many other democratic candidates down with her.
torridjoe @ 55
‘I was responding to your false assertion..’
Most of those that worship at the alter of HA think things are turning around in support of the left, i.e. hating GW and the repubs, or in HA terms, the neocons. The polls leaned on to justify the rants are not very good predictors. I think that most of hard-working Americans do not respond to polls, and are very happy with the way the country is heading.
nowonder @ 59
once again, non-responsive. You claimed most people think the country is running fine; you’re wrong. Just say “OK, I thought it was true but it’s very clearly not.”
GBS–I’m not necessarily arguing with your point, but you’re letting nowonder drag you off of his claim that people think things are going OK.
Gary @ 58
Link? Last I saw, 53% responded they were at least somewhat likely to vote for her.
TJ @ 61
“Lies, damned lies & statistics.” – Benjamin Disraeli
This is just WAAAYYY to early to tell. If Pirro gives her a serious fight in November 2006, Hillary’s viability for 2008 would plummet.
torridjoe @ 60
I’ll repeat for your benefit:
‘I think that most of hard-working Americans do not respond to polls, and are very happy with the way the country is heading.’
We obviously lurk in different crowds and have different opinions about what most Americans think about how the country is running. I stand by what I think, based on a collection of economic indicators, trends in various busines segments and a very LOW weighting of polls. Your LaLa land is fine for you.
TJ @ 60
I didn’t take it as arguing with me or me with you. I get what you’re saying, and I’m with you things are not OK. Not even close.
But I guess I’m just not a big poll guy. I like finality which is why I like elections and hate it when the results get drug into court.
No reasonable person can say the economy is good. Corporate profits are up, sure, but let’s face it the average American is making less. More Americans are losing healthcare and/or slipping into poverty. Oil companies have never made this much profit in their history, and yet they get an energy bill from Bush that lines their pockets with more tax cuts. Now they’re screwing us two ways at the pumps and tax breaks. Before oil hit $50 a barrel Bush was saying that oil companies don’t need tax breaks to look for oil because they are making enough. Bush also admitted that the energy bill won’t reduce our dependency on foreign oil which feeds the coffers of terrorists, it won’t lessen the costs of gas. The War on Terror is going poorly. Where’s Osama? John Carlson used to assume that Bin Laden died at Tora Bora, we now know that’s bullshit. North Korea went nuclear on Bush’s watch, Iran has given us The Finger and is going ahead with their nuclear program. And if anyone on the right bothered to pay attention to what the generals in Iraq are saying about the infrastructure being so poor it can’t support the citizens living there, it’s actually worse now than before we invaded. But, all the Faux News junkies will scream that the MSM never covers all the schools and firehouses we’re building while the Republican in congress yank 9/11 funds from NY. Bremmer lost $8.8 billion dollars in Iraq and not a peep from the right. We have a deficit that is out of control so there’s no such thing as a fiscal conservative in the Republican party anymore. But pass legislation to pay for road improvements that we need by adding 9 cents per gallon over three years and you’ll hear nothing but bitching from the right, but add $1.10-1.30 per gallon in less than a year and Oh it’s just free market capitalism. Can you imagine if Clinton were in office and a similar Downing Street Memo surfaced. How fast would they want to impeach the Commander in Chief? Yesterday, that’s how fast. Paul Hackett of Ohio runs as the 1st Iraq war veteran to run for office as a Democrat and as I predicted slandering from the right. Rush Limbaugh said the Marine only went to Fallujah to, and I quote, “pad his resume.” Now Cindy Sheehan is getting kicked around by the right because she lost her son in Iraq and wants to talk to the Commander in Chief while he’s on a 5 week vacation in the middle of a war. 1800+ solider killed in action in Iraq alone, over 13,000 wounded, and the forgotten war in Afghanistan where our real enemy is living, never had the same vigor applied to it as Iraq.
But other than that and a few other problems, shit everything is great. What are you worried about?
“What me worry?”
George W. Bush
64 continued
Oh yeah,
Scotty McClellan is liar. And Bush is a flip flopper for saying he’ll fire anyone in his administration for outing a CIA operative then changes it to convicted.
They should just put a big IHOP sign at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave where the 24/7 special is waffles with a big side of bacon straight form the Pork Barrel of Congress.
Bush likes his Kool-Aid Cherry flavored.
Rove doesn’t care what flavor his Kool-Aid is because his is administered via an douche bag.
The douche bag.
Moonbats – You can delude yourselves with whatever fantasies float your boat. The fact is that the liberal slide that started in 1994 will continue. Any outfit that would pick a goofball like Howard Dean to be the leader has zero chance of going anywhere.
Mark: And, without googling, who is the chairman for the GOP? I’ll give you a hint, his initials are KM.
But, seriously, parties rise and then fall as they get corrupt with power. It is becoming abundantly clear that the GOP has managed this in an amazingly short amount of time, given they were out of power for close to sixty years. Gerrymanding makes it hard to change the house, but Ohio has proved that it is possible. The GOP has overstepped on several issues, and they are on very thin ice. Doesn’t mean for sure that they will do badly in 06, but their has to be a strong chill going through the powers that be. And undoubtabley, the forces of Karl Rove will be out to smear all that question them…, assuming he isn’t in jail by then. Remember, at this point, Nixon looked very strong.
Anyone notice that the ss minnow is spending a lot of time over here. His blog is getting awfully boring and not attracting a lot of posts, especially now that he has banned most contrary voices. Apparenlty even he prefers HA.
That could be a good header for this board, Goldy, “HA, the board that Stefan Sharansky actual reads.”
JDB – WTF are you talking about with “corrupt” and “rise and fall”. GWB fixed the recession he inherited from bubba. Home ownership at all time high. Unemployment is low. People have money. Fed tax receipts at all time high. We’re freeing the world from a-hole dictators. We have the balls to tell france and the un to go to hell. We’re about to get the court problem under control. Things couldn’t be better at the fed level.
Now the feminist utopia of Washington is a different story. Clearly, there’s work to do here.
JDB @ 69
They’re sad aren’t they. I notice that Mr. Cynical won’t cures on (un)SP blog but has no problem telling Windie on HA that she’s a cocksucker and a dickhead. Then he has the balls to claim that conservatives had the moral high ground.
Hey, who wants to know the color of Stefan’s house?
Everyone take a guess. I’ll reveal the answer tomorrow.
Gotta get on my bad motor scooter and ride.
Redneck Mark,
Now the feminist utopia of Washington is a different story.
That’s a revealing comment, Mark.
Anyway, you asked what we mean by “corrupt.” Corrupt is, for example, when your party votes to change the rules so that a felon can remain House Majority Leader, because they know Tom Delay stands to be indicted, and want him to remain in that position. That is “corrupt.” Of course, that was such a glaring example that they got called off, backed off, and then used normal stalling and cover-up techniques to save their day.
Heath – You moonbats crack me up. Like when bubba was impeached and disbarred for lying to a grand jury in an attempt to conceal a pattern of predatory behavior in connection with a felony assault case he later settled for $800k.
Or by giving Ted the Swimmer a lifetime pass after getting drunk and killing a young woman.
No, really, what do you have against feminism. I want to hear that.
As for bubba: he committed perjury to cover up an affair.
Your prez committed perjury in the State of the Union Address to justify an illegal war. Then, when news leaked out, he had his watergate-era cronies put the informant’s wife at risk.
So I guess you all have a problem with women, huh?
So I guess you all have a problem with women, huh?
I have no problem with women running the show; I just have a problem with donk women running the show. The feminist on the left have proved themselves to be just a crooked and lie just as much as their male donk counterparts.
RUFUS,
That’s bullshit. If it weren’t for Gregoire and Cantwell, the evidence tapes of Enron traders fixing the market would never have been transcribed, and this state would still be paying off Enron contracts that were fraudulent to begin with.
If you come up with even one shred of believable evidence that either of those two are corrupt (and don’t start with the election — I said ‘believable’ not ‘fantasy fodder’), then I will wash your car with my tongue.
GBS @ 17
I didn’t mean to imply that I would favor computerized voting systems. I don’t think I could support any such system unless it could be proven to be hack-proof and fully auditable (both the software and the vote tabulations), and generally no less reliable than manual voting systems. I can’t really say much more than that, since I haven’t done enough reading on the matter — certainly not enough to really endorse or support their use.
I am a computer programmer. I wrote some of the COTS software used on Sequoita System’s central tabulator. I distrust their system. It could be made secure, but it appears that it has been made insecure. It also looks like the lack of security is deliberate.
Heath @ 75 – I have no problem with women. What I have a problem with are the feminist policies. Any man who’s ever been victimized by the family court system in this state can attest to it’s man hating nature.
There’s also the random nature with which the feminist way that this state approach things. Goldy suggested a couple of days ago that the tsunami warning system was an example of “responsible governance” by Gov. Gregoire. That’s crazy… it was just random. It wasn’t driven by any data on cost or benefit; it just felt good.
MRK @ 80 Well said, you leave no doubt about your hatred of women.
Donna@81 – OK. I do hate feminazi’s like you. Not because you’re a woman, but because you’re stupid. Read what I wrote you fucking idiot.
Hey, who wants to know the color of Stefan’s house?
Republican Yellow.
GBS @ 48: “Hanging chad = no fraud. Human error = no fraud.
WA state elections = no fraud.”
Are you saying fraud DIDN’T EXIST or it WASN’T PROVEN?
Yes, true human error is not fraud. There WERE cases of election fraud in WA — just as there are in every election everywhere. Technically, the judge that was registered at the KingCo admin building (and later corrected her registration) DID commit election fraud. People who voted for dead spouses DID commit election fraud.
As for hanging chads and ballot enhancements, they score equally on the “fraud meter” with your software sabotage — suspicious, possible, but unproven.
I believe that voting is not only every American’s right, but also their responsibility. EVERY vote should be counted (as cast) and EVERY vote should be legal. I also think that if you can’t manage to follow directions, your vote is worth the amount of effort you put into casting it.
It is too bad that our system exposes so much of the process to the two major parties, allowing it to be a political issue. But what are our options? Let the judicial branch oversee elections? Let the GOP & the Dems each pick a person + add a federal judge to be the overall supervisors in a county — like a canvassing board with supervisory power?
Some countries remove politicians from the elections process — at least by one level — by having the Parliament (or similar body) appoint an independent elections commission. Politicians can do NOTHING to impact the voting process (other than naming the commission members).
Fantasy is Ohio and Florida if anything.
Dindt Chrissy run on no new taxes… why do we have I-912 again?
I detect a great deal of mean spirited hate speech in this discussion, and I know that liberals and progressives are about peace, love and serenity. Where in the world could all of this negativity be coming from?
I know all evil originates in Carl Rove. He must be posting to this BLOG pretending to be a liberal in an evil attempt to make liberals look bad.
proud leftist @53 said….”Republican power cabal”
and just when i thought the far left couldn’t possibly sound any sillier……there it is.
republican power cabal????????
OMG…..my sides hurt from laughing…thanks.
Forrest Donk
Mama always told me life is like a box of ballots. You never know when you will need a box when counting for third time to put you over the top.
“When Republicans [in the state of Washington] were polled on whom they would support in 2008 for the Republican Presidential nomination, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani received 24%; Senator John McCain received 22%; Senator Bill Frist received 11%; Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney received 5%; Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich 4%; Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum received 4%; Virginia Senator George Allen received 2%; New York Governor George Pataki received 2%; Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel received 2%; and 24% were undecided.”
Strategic Vision Poll, August 10, 2005
http://soundpolitics.com/SV_WAAugust.pdf
Interesting how moderate Republicans are in this state. 55% of them support moderate candidates (Guiliani, McCain, Pataki, Romney, Hagel), 21% support conservative candidates (Frist, Gingrich, Santorum, Allen), and 24% are undecided.
Richard @ 89
The problem is that we moderates have been too silent for too long. The Hardcore Right has taken control of the political “works” and we’ve had candidates like Craswell or the wacko guy from Tacoma (don’t recall the 2004 race, but I’m sure you know who I mean).
The interesting thing is that the Far Right in WA has succeeded in doing something the Far Left is afraid to do — nominate candidates who represent the active base of the party. The Far Left TALKS about how wonderful it would be to have a Greenie or the like in office, but with few exceptions they (wisely?) put up candidates that push to the Left far enough to make the partisans happy, but not so far as to be unelectable. With the exception of maybe Rossi and McKenna, the GOP hasn’t caught on. The WA GOP’s “all or nothing” policy is stupid.
31
No, I’m a cute fluffy little bunny with a cottontail who loves to shit on Stefan’s lawn.
39
“Silly wabbit. Most people in the country think the country is running pretty good.”
Yeah, they can’t wait to pay $3 for gas. Not to worry, they won’t have to wait long.
44
College Republicans? Isn’t that the outfit that scams senior citizens?
“Thursday, October 28, 2004 – Page updated at 04:26 P.M.
“Fund-raising group milks vulnerable senior citizens
“By David Postman and Jim Brunner
“Seattle Times staff reporters
“Copyright 2004, The Seattle Times Co.
“The College Republican National Committee has raised $6.3 million this year through an aggressive and misleading fund-raising campaign that collected money from senior citizens ….
“Many of the top donors were in their 80s and 90s. The donors wrote checks — sometimes hundreds and, in at least one case, totaling more than $100,000 — to … the College Republicans ….
“And little of the money went to election efforts … nearly 90 percent went to direct-mail vendors and postage expenses, according to records filed with the Internal Revenue Service.
“Some of the elderly donors, meanwhile, wound up bouncing checks and emptying their bank accounts … the family of an elderly Indiana woman with Alzheimer’s disease demanded that her donations be returned. The woman’s family said it had sent a registered letter asking that she be taken off the mailing list, but the solicitations continued.
“Only after a newspaper reported on the story did the College Republicans refund $40,000 to the family, according to Jackie Boyle, one of the woman’s nieces.
“‘I think this is a nationwide scam,’ Boyle said on hearing of recent complaints. ‘They’re covering the whole country … they need to be investigated.'”
For complete article go to http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....bs28m.html
52
I SAW YOU! I SAW YOU! I WAS THE BUNNY WIGGLING HIS EARS!
55
You mean he didn’t? Sure fooled me. I could’ve sworn the vote was rigged.
80
Gee, Mark of the Red Neck, did the family court make you support your children? Can you give us one good reason why you shouldn’t?
Roger @ 96
Don’t go near that topic. I personally know at least a couple of good men who if they weren’t shafted by family court judges, had to spend a king’s ransom to make sure it didn’t happen (i.e. to at least get 50/50 custody, etc.). And, yes, I’ve known some of the women involved and at least one of them literally “goes off her meds” every once in a while. Her husband was lucky, though, and at least got 50/50 custody.
Mark:
You have been reading the minnow’s board again. It corrupts even an intelligent man like you:
“Technically, the judge that was registered at the KingCo admin building (and later corrected her registration) DID commit election fraud.”
No, technically, she may have caste an illegal vote, but that wasn’t fraud. It would seem to be, on its face illegal (but I’m not an election attorney, and I couldn’t think of a more boring thing to be), but it might fall through a loop hole. However, it is unquestionable that she was a legal voter, and her mistake of registering in an attempt to protect her home (see the murder of the judge’s family earlier), hardly was done to throw the election.
If I steal your car, what I did was illegal (against the law), but not fraud (done with an attempt to deceive). More importantly, most people by election fraud think organized attempt to overthrow an election, not small random illegal votes. To a certain point, all elections, since they are human endevors, will have a certain amount of error in them. Humans are not perfect. But, while these errors might be illegal, they are not evidence of fraud in the traditional sense.
The only cases that even come close to fraud so far are the people voting for dead realitives, but these have trended Rossi, and most of them are pittiful stories, not real attempts to throw an election.
And, I would bewilling if you look as closely at any election in the US as closely as the Gregoire Election, you would find similar error rates in at least 3 out of ten, and maybe even worse.
The shere fact that Maleng and McKay are not investigating tells you that there was no fraud. Which is what Judge Bridges found.
Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make the system better, but stop using fraud when all you mean is badly done.
Gary @ 86:
It’s Karl Rove, like Karl Marx.
First, go read a few threads over at the minnows or any other righwing blog, then come back and say you are sorry.
Second, search any where and find a blog where I swear.
Third, having said that. Fuck you!
JDB @ 98: “…if you look as closely at any election in the US as closely as the Gregoire Election, you would find similar error rates in at least 3 out of ten, and maybe even worse… stop using fraud when all you mean is badly done.”
There were more than errors. There were documented cases of illegal votes — regardless of whose side they favored. I also said as much. There IS fraud in almost every election — especially ones in large cities/counties/states.
As to the legal definition of “fraud,” you MIGHT be correct regarding the specific judge example — but only MIGHT be correct. There are five criteria for fraud:
1.) misrepresentation – CHECK
2.) knowledge of falsity – CHECK
3.) intent to induce reliance – CHECK
4.) justifiable reliance – CHECK
5.) resulting damage – the ONLY iffy one
One could argue that the resulting damage was the diminished faith in the elections system, but that might be a stretch — especially since she was entitled to vote. HOWEVER, those people who voted on behalf of dead relatives most definitely commited fraud.
But it also comes down to whether you’re using the word “fraud” in a courtroom, with all the strict definitions, or if you’re merely talking to a layperson about illegal activities during an election.
And finally, what happened in WA and in many, many other elections is far more than just “badly done.” “Badly done” is the Keystone Cops routine at the KingCo Elections office. “Fraud” and/or “illegal activity” — proven or merely suspected — is what happened on a case-by-case basis. But fraud and illegal activity happen in (almost) all elections.
JDB @ 98
Below is language from the Secretary of State’s office regarding “election fraud.” Note the inclusion of “providing false information,” which the judge did. Also, 9.45 RCW includes a reference to illegal voting-related acts (29A.84 RCW) and calls it “election fraud.” That usage is the state’s, not solely mine. Sorry, you lose this one.
Election fraud
Washington has strong laws and procedures addressing election fraud.
The laws address lying about qualifications, providing false information, and registering in more than one location. They prohibit accepting payments for registering, vote buying, and guard against discrimination.
Violations can be a Class C Felony.
Washington is building a statewide voter registration database, proposed by Reed and later mandated by Congress, which will diminish opportunity for fraud even further. Because every county and the state will use and access the same system, voters cannot register in more than one county.
In 2001, Secretary of State Sam Reed passed the Voter Integrity Act to ensure all registering voters are American citizens and to verify registrations across county lines.
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/off.....tZkw%3D%3D
heath@77–
So heath…you are now giving credit to Gregoire & Cantwell for bringing down ENRON. You are a mighty sick, delusional bastard who needs professional help immediately. Please shut down your computer heath and dial 9-1-1. The nice men in the white coats will be at your door shortly….you will get a nice ride on a bed with wheels. Don’t be concerned heath when they strap you down. IT’S A NEW LEFTIST PINHEAD SAFETY REQUIREMENT BY YOUR FRIENDS GREGOIRE & CANTWELL. Relax and enjoy.
heath wants us to spend billions preparing to save us all from a 1700-foot tsunami wave….and now this!!!
heath@79–
On another post you said you were an engineer with expertise in Tsunami’s. Now you are a computer programmer. My oh my…heath is pretty much whatever is convenient for him to be. Sybil-like.
Mark:
At least now we are getting some where. Your five step analysis is correct, and while I could argue with a few of your conclusions, I think we can both agree that you can’t quite shoehorn illegal votes into fraud.
But I won’t let you walk away on common usage. If you say voter or election fraud to the average person on the street, they do not think of randome improper votes, they think of an organized effort to fix the election. There clearly was nothing like that.
I have no problem with you all arguing that the number of illegal votes were to high, and that we should do better with our election procedures (something I agree with), but people like the minnow and his lackeys use the term fraud because they want people to think there was a grand conspiracy to change the outcome of the election. The one thing we all should be in agreement with at this point is, while not perfect, there was no attempt to throw the election (Otherwise, surely, we would have AG Senn).
Illegal does not equal fraud. There is absolutely no evidence that there was any organized effort to change the outcome of the election.
As to the judge herself, is it providing false information when you give an address where you can be reached and where everything about you can be verified? I don’t know, but I would think it would be hard to get a conviction. It is hardly an attempt to decieve. You would probably have to prove she did so in order to achieve some nefarious purpose (intent). I don’t think you can.
The dead votes come a lot closer. However, I would guess that you have these in every election, and that most of the time they just don’t matter. Even in the Gregoire election, from everything we know (and, lets face it, we know a lot at this part), there were fewer dead votes than the margin of victory, and the dead seemed to have leaned toward Rossi.
It would be a better use of the language if you complained about illegal votes. Even if you are trying to use “fraud” technically, the word has been corrupted by the ss minnow and his like who want to scare people into believing that there was a grand conspiracy to prevent Rossi from being voted into office, and from the common usage (election fraud = old Chicago politics).
That being said, I think we are in agreement that there are always illegal votes (and while I won’t speak for you on this, I think you might agree that no matter what, there always will be some) in any election. Lets throw away the conspiracy theories of the right and work on the problem and we can get a lot done. Look at what Sam Reed has done so far (which should take care of 90% of the problems from the last election). Of course, look at how he is maligned by the minnow and his lackeys because he won’t go along with the grand conspiracy theory, and instead actually works the problem.
97
Gee Mark, what do you expect family court judges to do? Chop the kids in two and give each parent half the kid?
Judges:
1. Have to put the child’s welfare first;
2. Can’t help it if you chose a defective woman, or one that was all right to start with, but became defective under your handling;
3. Don’t have an effective way to enforce visitation orders, because if they throw the custodial parent in jail, there’s no one to take care of the kids;
4. Can’t keep the custodial parent from being a jerk;
5. Somebody has to take care of the kids, and the kids have to eat even, if the custodial parent is a jerk;
6. Can’t keep the custodial parent from moving away;
7. Can’t ignore the mandatory child support schedule to give your debts or personal wants higher priority than your child’s legal entitlement to support from both parents;
8. Can’t make unreasonable people be reasonable;
9. Can’t make the custodial parent take her meds.
Mark, you got yourself into this when you hooked up with that gal. If she’s giving you a hard time, I’m sorry, but that’s your problem not society’s problem. The judge is just doing his job. Have a little pity for the judge; it’s a thankless and impossible job.
I wonder how many Republican judges do exactly the same thing Judge Fletcher did.
99
Well Mark, as long as we’re talking about election “fraud,” would you say it’s “fraud” to try to throw an election to your side by using various strategems and subterfuges to keep eligible voters from being able to vote?
Wingys are wasting their time talking about fraud. They should be talking about stupidity. Namely, Chris Vance’s stupidity, and Dino Rossi’s stupidity. They had over 250 valid signatures in their possession that they didn’t turn in, because they didn’t want to legitimize the 700 valid signatures the Democrats turned in. The Democratic ballots were counted, the Republican ballots weren’t. Could someone tell me again how many votes Gregoire won by? I do believe it was less than 250? Anybody? Hmmmm.
Stupidity, not fraud, Mark. Stupidity.
S T U P I D I T Y
The Republicans were STUPID, Mark.
S T U P I D
Roger @ 104
Yes.
Dear Cynical,
yOU ARE
You are completely full of lies.
Go look up who transcribed the Enron evidence tapes. Was it Cheney’s buddies at FERC? No. Was it Maria Cantwell’s investigation. Yes.
How can you argue with that, other than by lying?
Roger @ 107
I really wasn’t trying to rehash the 2004 election. The point was mainly that there is a combination of stupdity, errors, mistakes AND fraud in every election. I think it is disingenuous to focus only on the types of frauds that the GOP is more likely to commit. ALL fraud, including voter suppression, is wrong, wrong, wrong.
As for the Vance strategy issues, if what you say is true, then he was stupid. I happen to think that a lot of WA GOP strategy sucks, but have found any attempts to suggest change ignored by the hardline party regulars in my area.
I have to say the concept of “distributed voter fraud” resonates with me quite a bit — and, yes, for both sides of the aisle. If you’re not familiar with the term, Jim Miller (who does write on SP) came up with it to describe fraudulent practices committed by individuals acting alone or in concert toward a common goal. In other words, if Bob were to vote twice in favor of Senator Steve, he may not change the election by himself, but he is contributing to an overall fraud — especially if he knows or suspects that others will do the same thing.
JDB @ 103
While it may be a mitigating factor in sentencing or even filing, fraud or other crimes don’t take into account why you did it. Even though Bob was feeding his starving-to-death children, he DID steal a loaf of bread — even if the prosecutor won’t file or the judge gives him probation. The judge DID knowingly commit an illegal act by putting a false address. And, in the case of a judge, “she should know better.”
As for “common usage” and the common man, I think it would depend on the circles you run in.
What about the SoS’s and RCW’s loose usage of the “election fraud” term?
JDB: “(Otherwise, surely, we would have AG Senn).”
Funny thing on that. I know some very party-loyal and “involved” Dems who said that Senn caused some serious cringes. She wasn’t exactly popular with her staff, either. My guess is that Dems held their noses and voted McKenna, just like some Republicans voted for Kreidler and Sonntag.
heath@110
Do you honestly believe that Detective Maria Cantvotewell was actually the person investigating those tapes?? Is this going to be one of her campaign cornerstones??? You are delusional…from endlessly reading the LEFTIST PINHEAD LUNATIC FRINGE BLOGS!!
Look at your window for me heath….any 1700 foot high tsunami’s on the horizon you dipshit??
Wabbit at 104 – Courts don’t GAF about what’s best for the child. They only care about transferring money from men to women. That’s ALL it’s about.
My ex developed $300/day drug habit and spent all the child support and all the welfare on drugs. Ran up $200k in credit card debt.
She bought rags for clothes for my daughter from VV. One weekend there was NO FOOD IN THE HOUSE. My daughter finally found some stale taco shells and that’s all she ate for a weekend. She had one pair of socks. Mom even quit buying toilet paper. The situation was so chaotic, that daughter missed about half of two consecutive school years. Becca process does NOT work.
I spent thousand on attorney fees trying to free my daughter, but to no avail. So don’t any of you feminists or their sympathizers tell me how good the family court system is cause it ain’t.
The story has a happy ending however. Mom did my daughter, me and the world a favor and took herself out a few months ago, and my daughter is safe with me now.
Roger @ 104
“…what do you expect family court judges to do? Chop the kids in two and give each parent half the kid?”
Have the guts to award primary custody to a father. Or, at the very least, have both parents start on equal footing instead of presuming the mother is a better parent.
“Judges:
1. Have to put the child’s welfare first;”
Yes, they do. But they don’t always.
2. Can’t help it if you chose a defective woman, or one that was all right to start with, but became defective under your handling;
That is a load of crap. By your logic, an abused woman deserved to be hit because she “brought it on herself.” Don’t be an asshole.
3. Don’t have an effective way to enforce visitation orders, because if they throw the custodial parent in jail, there’s no one to take care of the kids;
4. Can’t keep the custodial parent from being a jerk;
5. Somebody has to take care of the kids, and the kids have to eat even, if the custodial parent is a jerk;
6. Can’t keep the custodial parent from moving away;
7. Can’t ignore the mandatory child support schedule to give your debts or personal wants higher priority than your child’s legal entitlement to support from both parents;
8. Can’t make unreasonable people be reasonable;
What do 2 through 8 have anything to do with the determination of the custodial parent in the first place.
9. Can’t make the custodial parent take her meds.
One, you can not give primary custody to that parent in the first place. Two, you can make “ongoing mental health care” a condition of custody. Three, the non-custodial parent can file to have custody changed — though that is a massive and expensive undertaking.
“Mark, you got yourself into this when you hooked up with that gal…”
Survey says, “X.” It isn’t about me. Actually, the “meds” situation I mentioned involves someone I know very well, though.
The fault for women getting custody by default and men getting screwed by the courts falls SQUARELY on the shoulders of men of your generation. You (or the men in generations before you) never made an effort to be a highly-involved parent. Just take a look at the different level of men’s involvement with childbirth between today and 30 years ago. Liberal men are even MORE to blame because while they protested for parenting rights for women, minorities and people with alternative lifestyles, they had a chance to speak up for truly equal, across-the-board parenting rights, but didn’t.
Mr. Cynical,
I know for a fact that it was her staff that had the audio tapes transcribed so they could be used as evidence.
Look it up, dumbass.
Drop the Tsunami thing, Cynical. You know my point in bringing that up was that you were referring to Tsunamis as the 10′ was a ‘big one.’ There’s nothing we could do if there were a 1700′ Tsunami, obviously. The point is, you don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground.
Heath
Mark:
It think it is just that, loose usage. But we might be to the point where we agree to disagree.
As for Senn, you are right. I voted for Sidran, and think he would have won had not the right played some dirty tricks right before the primary and got sympathy going for Senn. I don’t think McKenna is great, but he is competent. Of course the minnow and his lackeys will probably start attacking him for not arresting everyone in King County Government after they get bored with kicking Sam Reed around.
My point, though, is if the wide spread fraud surely the Democrats would have totally controlled the election. As for Miller’s distributed vote fraud, that is just foolish. It is an attempt to show a conspiracy without having to prove it (sort of like ID, I can’t prove anything, so this answer must be true). The problem is, from what we know, the errors (distributed vote fraud) did not effect the election. The illegal votes broke equal to the election (not a big surprise), or, at worse, broke for Rossi.
Again, the system should be improved so we have fewer of these problems, but if you use a loaded term like “fraud,” especially given the way it has been corrupted by the minnow and his lackeys, you get in the way of reform. Call them illegal votes, and you will be accurate and productive.
And there is no reason to hold you nose and vote for Mike Kriedler, he is a very good man that was slandered by the right in 1994. Like Sam Reed, he puts good government ahead of ideology.
JDB @ 116
I had no problem voting for Kreidler or Sonntag — especially considering their opponents. I was talking about the more-party-line Republicans having “loyalty” issues.
In a nutshell, I think if someone knowingly votes illegally, that is plain and simple fraud because the INTENT is to damage the election — even if that isn’t the end result. Call it “attempted fraud,” if you wish. Nothing in the legal definition talks about “conspiracy” being required.
roger@92…….you are a girl bunny…just admit it. you blew your cover with the neutering comment.LOL.
so which is it bunny-kins? we waged this war for oil and are stealing it? or we are getting shafted by high oil prices? it can’t be both.
besides….as a good liberal don’t you just despise oil? doesn’t it make your little bunny skin crawl to have to type your answers back ON OIL products? AKA….your computer?
which is it….love oil and use it or hate oil and never use anything made from it again?
ChristmasGhost @ 118
Just to play the Devil’s Advocate; why couldn’t it be that the war was waged to secure the 2nd largest oil fields in the world, create uncertainty, shortages and volatility the market which always leads to higher prices regardless of the commodity in question. Under this scenario just about every industry in the petroleum supply sector would benefit from a fabricated shortage, premium charges on the underlying commodity with a huge supply secured in a hostile area.
If you’re going to make an investment of that magnitude, using the US military and sacrificing so many lives, you’re not going to give away the store, are you? At least not with a Bush/Cheney mentality you’re not. Remember, Liberalism is akin to Socialism according to the right wind radio pundits. Wouldn’t you agree? So giving it away cheaply doesn’t fit the free market mentality of the people in power.
Not that I believe for one second that this war is about oil, however.
GBS,
Not that I believe for one second that this war is about oil, however.
So, what is the war about in your opinion? Is it a “big dick” issue for the Bush’s? Legacy? Terrorism? WMD’s? I am interested in your opinion on the matter.
If Cheney or Jeb are nominated, as a moderate, I will vote Libertarian or Democrat.
I see nothing saying they will, and Cheney has steadfastly said he would not, but if he does he will get no support from me.
I’d rather see Powell.
Heath, you cannot commit perjury in a speech.
I dont wanna get into the rest of your posts, but really, if you dont understand what perjury is, get a legal dictionary.
Plus he did not lie anyway. he reported accurately what the British intelligence said and still say to this day.
In some books, they’d might say foolish:…
@ 121
As I told PacMan some months ago, I believe Bush opened up the second front on the War on Terror.
He’s poor planning and misunderstanding and under estimantion of the regions geopolitics, culture and history created a huge military blunder. Had he done it right it could have been and should have been the Right war, Right Place, Right time.
But as it turned out John Kerry was correct: Wrong War, Wrong Place, Wrong time.
Mishandling the War on Terror, or WW3, is no job for someone who has a track record of failed leaderhip a the C level for their entire career. Bush has grossly mishandled WW3 to the point that supporting him undermines the readiness of our military.
Look at the progress, or lack thereof, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do you honestly think this is the best America can do? Or, do you think we are capable of more?