In writing about the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s plan to file an initiative purging WA’s voter rolls, and forcing everybody to reregister, WashBlog’s Noemie Maxwell asks:
Why does the Evergreen Freedom Foundation pour probably hundreds of thousands of dollars – the talents and time of its staff members and dedicated citizen volunteers, into the project of convincing the voters of Washington State, despite all evidence to the contrary, that our government and our citizens cannot be trusted?
But to answer this and other questions about the EFF’s voter purge proposal, all one really needs to know about this initiative is that it is ILLEGAL… and they know it.
I’m no lawyer (much to my mother’s chagrin,) but most statutes really aren’t all that difficult to read, and the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 — commonly known as “Moter Voter” — lays down very clear guidelines governing the circumstances by which states can purge voters from the rolls… and pandering, partisan paranoia is not one of them.
Go ahead, argue the EFF’s case all you want, but Sec. 1973gg-6 (a) ensures that in the administration of voter registration for federal elections, states shall:
(3) provide that the name of a registrant may not be removed from the official list of eligible voters except –
( A ) at the request of the registrant;
( B ) as provided by State law, by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity; or
( C ) as provided under paragraph (4);
(4) conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters by reason of –
( A ) the death of the registrant; or
( B ) a change in the residence of the registrant, in accordance with subsections ( b ), ( c ), and ( d ) of this section;
That’s it. Once registered, a voter “may not be removed from the official list of eligible voters except” at his own request, or due to felony conviction or mental incapacity, death, or change of address. There are absolutely no other circumstances under federal law that a registrant may be removed from the rolls. None. Nada. Bupkis.
There’s not much room for interpretation here, especially in light of the stated legislative intent:
The purposes of this subchapter are –
(1) to establish procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for Federal office;
Clearly, purging the entire voter roll and forcing everybody to reregister could only achieve the opposite.
Which of course, the EFF wouldn’t mind. But they’re not stupid, and neither are their lawyers, so of course they understand at least as well as I do that their initiative cannot possibly achieve their stated objective. Which brings us back to Noemi’s question: why would the EFF pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into such a blatantly undemocratic, illegal, and ultimately futile initiative?
Hmm. Well… because this initiative has absolutely nothing to do with ensuring the integrity of the voter rolls. No, this cynical little abuse of the initiative process is purely strategic, and is focused entirely on propping up the election prospects of Mike McGavick, Dave Reichert, and Republican state legislators.
You see, even a losing campaign can be a worthwhile investment if it pays collateral benefits on election day, and anybody who thinks initiatives are simply about passing laws, hasn’t been paying close attention to how the parties and their surrogates routinely use initiative campaigns to influence public opinion and strategically drive voter turnout. Indeed, some initiatives — like the EFF’s latest stinking pile of political bullshit — are entirely strategic, having absolutely no reasonably obtainable, direct legislative goals whatsoever.
So why would the EFF sponsor this initiative? Because they are a bunch of deceitful, manipulative, calculating liars, whose only goal is to seize political power for themselves and their right-wing fellow travelers, at any cost. It is fair to say that everything about this initiative is a lie, from their feigned concern over the cleanliness of our voter rolls (our Republican Secretary of State has found no evidence of illegal votes,) to their absolutely bizarre proposal to eliminate voter fraud by, um… eliminating voters.
I could spend pages refuting the EFF’s arguments, but to do so in the context of an initiative that clearly violates federal law is not only a waste of time, it’s exactly what the EFF wants. The entire purpose of this initiative is to rile up the paranoid Republican base enough to turn them out on election day, and I for one, am not interested in giving the EFF the bogus debate they want.
The EFF has proposed a laughable and illegal initiative, aimed at a problem that doesn’t exist… and it only deserves to be debated as such.
(B) as provided by State law,
I’ve not read the initiative, but if it makes a change to the state law then it is provided for under federal law.
Or did I mis-read something?
And BTW, I don’t support the initiative. Just want to make sure everyone is being totally honest.
The federal law applies only to elections for federal office, which includes President and Vice President, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative. Therefore, it does not appear to be an impediment to requiring re-registration for elections for state and local offices.
This be racist, as black Democrats will not know how to “register” or “reregister”! In addition, the dead black Democrat vote will be “disenfranched”!! That is also racist!
Seeker @1,
Yes, your are missing something. It’s “as provided by State law, by reason of criminal conviction or mental incapacity;”… that’s a single clause. State’s may exclude felons. Not all do.
Roger @2,
So… what? Surely the EFF is not going to propose that we keep two entirely separate voter registration rolls, one for federal and one for state and local?
there is only one voter roll .. not a separate roll for state elections vs. federal elections.
JCH –
Ahhh. Your always reliable racist comments are wonderful and enlightening. I wonder how blanket statements like “black democrats won’t know how to reregister” will do alot to bring this country together.
I have been reading that the ‘new’ white supremacists were supposed to “blend in” and use a “softer approach” to finding new recruits and spewing their hate speech. Good to see that you stick to traditions.
If the right is using the initiative process to increase its base voter turn out, what initiatives could the left promote to do the same for the progressive base?
No voters. No fraud. What could be easier? Republicans are the true revolutionaries in this instance. They are riding the crest of history in their own minds, leading the people into the victorious future.
One disenfranchised voter is a tragedy. Millions of disenfranchised voters is the for-ordained outcome of the historical zeitgeist.
Moscow – The concave, snow-covered roof of a large Moscow market collapsed early Thursday, killing at least 49 people and forcing rescuers to clear away concrete slabs and metal beams to reach possible survivors trapped in the wreckage, officials said. /break/ Investigators were looking at three possible causes of the collapse: Improper maintenance of the building, a buildup of snow and errors in the building’s design, Moscow prosecutor Anatoly Zuyev said. Two to three inches of snow had fallen overnight, on top of 18.5 inches that had fallen since the start of winter. Lawyers from Lowenstein and Silverstein, ESQ, are on our way to Moscow, Idaho to sue for the “chillin” [a little Dr. Joyce Elders humor]!!! Oh, wait!!!!!!!!!!!!! This happened in Moscow, Russia. Never mind!!!]
“Count Every Democrat Vote”!!! [including the dead votes, the double votes, the “O. J.” votes, and the Mickey Mouse votes!]
Why does the EFF hate the state of Washington and the law so much?
It is a foolish, illegal attempt. The good news is that it drains money from other wingnut ideas. Heck, we can look foward to Tim Eyeman and Bob Williams, media whores that they are, fighting over which of their stupid ideas is the real conservative ideas. Should we hate queers or voters more. Heck, I would turn in to KVI for that fun debate. Imagine the small brains of people like Just another Chicken Hawks brain exploding as he has to choose between his homophobic and racist leanings.
JCH,
Still a stupid racist.
It has been ever thus…
Just another Chicken Hawk at 10:
If you are a supporter of counting dead and double voters, you should change your name to Dino [JCH] Rossi, since the only known dead and double voters broke for him.
Why is the left so afraid of getting illegitimate voters off the roles?
Why do they want to make it easier to register and vote illegitimatly?
I can think of only one reason…
This strategy must be why that toad Chuck Cushman is reappearing…
Possible motive? How about an attack on the Washington State Supreme Court?
First, Republicans pray that a King County Superior Court judge is the first to determine that the initiative is illegal. This is not essential to their plan, but if the decision is issued by a King County judge, then they get a windfall as right-wing talk radio rants and raves about how pinko King County judges “refuse to let the state’s voters clean up the voter roles, which King County politicians refused to do”.
Then it gets pushed up to the Wash. State Supreme Court on appeal, and when the Supreme Court affirms the lower court decision, the Republicans use it bang away at whichever Wash. State Supreme Court Justice they most want to get voted out of office. Since few voters really know anything about the judges they elect, a focused campaign against a couple of justices may be effective.
In the recent governor’s election, they found that actually losing an election can sometimes be more beneficial than winning one. They can spend the next few years ranting and raving about how it was “stolen” from them, drum up a lot of money from the entire nation to “fight the Democrats”, and not be burdened by actually having to govern (as W. has recently found to be more of a challenge than he thought).
And you’d be right litmus, its because the state already is removing illegal voters from the rolls and recent partisan efforts have been thinly veiled attempts to remove non party voters from the rolls instead of illegal voters.
Bill, are you disrespecting Litmas. Since he spells his name Litmas, rather than Litmus, I can only assume you are ‘dissing’ his ignorance.
Now, this little exercise is to point out that an overfine concern with the niceties of political discourse is PRISSY, HYPOCRITICAL, and TOTALL UNNECESARY.
I think the real cynical issue is, that even if the initiative succeeded and even if it was legal, it would amount to a big “who cares”.
Because *if* you accept the premise that there are sufficient loopholes to allow people to register/vote fraudulantly, which is their underlying belief, then anyone who is illegally registered before the purge, could do so again after the purge.
So whats the point?
If, *if* they really want to fix the problems, and ensure the integrity of the vote, and even assuming they are sincere, they would be better served supporting corrections to address the loopholes in the registration and verification processes.
This is a waste of time.
Ah, Sven, you are the master of misdirection:
“supporting corrections to address the loopholes in the registration and verification processes”
They aren’t loopholes, you troll! They are there to make it EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO VOTE! What you refer to as “loopholes” are the specific intent of the law, which is to revent disenfranchisement of voters. While YOU may feel they are too lenient, our state legislators who wrote the law recognize that we live in a democracy. Another way of putting it: If you have to err, taking away a vote from someone who is eligible is worse than mistakenly giving the vote to someone who shouldn’t have it.
Don’t like them apples? Run for office and change the law. Otherwise STFU and STFD.
Wow tree frog, you are dense.
Sven I agree, it seems this is yet another manufactured issue. I am guessing that its only there because the phrase ‘vote fraud’ is such a catchy sound byte.
I did leave off any reference to federal law in my post — which actually is more directly applicable here. Of course, given the fact that the same voter list will be used for federal and state voting, the federal law would apply here. So I added a note directing readers here.
On his comment on the washblog post, Zappini also points out the applicability of the federal law and says the following:
“The (PI) article states:
“The initiative would make all voter registrations inactive until people proved their citizenship and reregistered.”
“Inactive” has a very specific meaning. It’s a flag in the database that would require that voter to be re-verified. In no way is the voter prevented from voting, or disenfranchised.”
What this means to me is that EFF may be crafting this initiative so that voters can be hassled at just a low enough level (continued requests for updated info) that they’re discouraged from voting — but that the initiative is more likely to stand against legal challenges.
Of course, as Goldy points out here, regardless of the eventual legal fate of any such initiative, simply having it on the ballot is a way to ‘get out the vote’ for McGavick and company.
It’s a win-win for the EFF — in the short term. In the long term, we all lose because democracy is harmed.
So why would the EFF sponsor this initiative? Because they are a bunch of deceitful, manipulative, calculating liars, whose only goal is to seize political power for themselves and their right-wing fellow travelers, at any cost. It is fair to say that everything about this initiative is a lie, from their feigned concern over the cleanliness of our voter rolls (our Republican Secretary of State has found no evidence of illegal votes,) to their absolutely bizarre proposal to eliminate voter fraud by, um… eliminating voters.
Who’s the paranoid one?
Not dense Bill, just don’t like hypocrisy. Don’t call anyone names, but wait . . .if you disagree with me then you are “dense” or an “idiot”. You sir are a FOOL. And an abysmally unself aware hypocrite.
If you attempt to impose your standards on others but not to yourself, you are beyond redemption .
Further, whether this gambit by the EFF is “manufactured” or real, it is yet another obscene effort to destroy the body politic. If you are this mild in your appraisal of this type of destructive political
machination, then you become either a dupe for Republicons, or are troll. Which is it?
You can protest all you want, but the middle is ‘no-man’s land’ in Gingrich’s civil war.
You take the position of the caterpillar”I mean what I say I mean” BULLSHIT.
You claim no party affiliation. BULLSHIT.
7 – NEED A PROGRESSIVE ISSUE – VOILA
IT IS ALREDY IN THE WORKS – DEFENDING THE RECENTLY PASSED GAY RIGHTS BILL.
WITH AN EARLY START AND RIDING THE SUCESS IN THE LEGISLATURE QUEERS ARE GOING TO PUT TOGETHER ONE HELL OF A FIGHT BACK CAMPAIGN.
MORE LATER
Rereading the posts, I’m thinking bill, litmas and Sven are either the same person, or they got the same Rethughlican talking points memo.
Well, if it walks like a troll, and smells like a troll. . . .
And your reading comprehension skills are also at a third grade level. You might want to go back and look at what I actually said rather than trying to push it into something you get to whine about. ‘tard.
Guess what, Gingrich was wrong. Neither the dems nor the reps have a majority. In fact neither has more than 30%. Gingrich was trying to create a false dilema. It is not either one party or the other take the whole package of one. Both sides do have points if you listen and both are full of crooks who care more about their party than the country.
In fact, since you seem to have swallowed a party line somewhere you really are just as idiotic as someone like JCH or Cynical echoing the talk show circuit.
Wake up someday, the parties are not looking out for your best interest. The are in it for the power, nothing more.
Ok, bill, you solved it. You would prefer chaos in voter law here in Washington. I call TROLL. Whether an idiotic Naderite, or Kevin Carnes, it matters not. If you attack political parties in preference to attacking a truly destructive initiative, then you stand fully revealed. TROLL.
GBS writes, “Spent a few weeks in Bangkok and “Padia” Beach.” [ Errrrr, E-6 Hillary, Would that be Pattaya Beach? ROTFLMAO!!!! “Padia”!!!! Spell much, Hillary????? Any yes, I was there!!!!!!!! “Padia”!!!!!!!!! Classic!!!!!!!!!!!]
Hillary!! Who is John Galt? Come, Grasshopper!!! Try!! Don’t give up!!! [OK, Someone help GBS. He requires assistance!]
“Padai Beach”……….Yeah, You were there!!!!!!! Classic!!!! Spell much????????????????
TFF @29
If you attack political parties in preference to attacking a truly destructive initiative
bill was doing nothing of the sort from my read. Do you understand the gist of what will occur to this “initiative” once it goes before a judge? Let me clue you in, and I’m sure I am taking some minor literary license from Goldy:
And here’s the windup, and the throw…ohmygosh!…he swung a mighty swing, and caught the most air for my money I have ever seen…Swing and a miss…
TFF, this initiative is ILLEGAL…understand?
“The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality. Today Christians stand at the head of our country. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press– in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past years.”
–Adolf Hitler
and in other news…
FCC Plans Fines in Broadcast Indecency Cases
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
bill @28
Excellent points. But your lefty ideas couched in moderation and my righty idealism that bemoans the lost good ol’days of debate is enough to blind those who need their daily fix…
I don’t know what to do about it other than wait for the next election, but 9 months or 3 years is a long way to go…
Larry the urbanite @20
If you have to err, taking away a vote from someone who is eligible is worse than mistakenly giving the vote to someone who shouldn’t have it.
I agree, but thanks for the straw man. Why would there have to be a choice? Keep an unqualified individual from voting. Allow an eligible person their right. Seems simple and unencumbering to me.
Naturally, since this “initiative” is ILLEGAL, it doesn’t matter…
Goldy,
Why are you working up your base?
Launch a Fedeal suit — now — under the voting rigths law as amended, due process, and other great politicla traditions.
A Federal Judge can injunct the process if there is a shred of Federal issue. In the case of voting – since there are not two systems for voters, and in effect the States act as agents for Federal elections, it striks me a Federal Judges might say — this is too chaotic and a too draconian solution to any problems inherent in a given state voter data base.
Love to kick their butt early on. Remember we have some liberal Federal Judges in this circut.
These are the same people who put the pretend case before Bridges. Thier legal acumen is about zilch. Harcks in truth, in the worst sense of the word.
I will be a paintiff, any others?
My voting rights are in peril. To be manipulated by a bunch of partisans who think the sense of bad votes, bad resgistrations — all that — still has political shelf life.
BOB,
I don’t think in terms of your sexual orientation (frankly, I don’t care)…but since you are bringing it up, can I ask why you want to?
151….Ah, The truth shall set you free!!! Captain’s Mast!!! And violations of the UCMJ!! Now I see that the bitterness is still around, Clarice, errrr, Hillary!! I see the chip on your shoulder is a bitter one!! Any you lied about your punishment, as any “E Man” who strikes a commissioned officer would get a little brig time. Or did you just “wiff” him, “Brokeback Mountain” style????? So bitter, for soooooooooooo long!! And the Captain shit on you because you were a shitbird!!!!!!!!!! SHITBIRD, Hillary!!!!!!!!!! And while all the real SEALs were enjoying Pattaya Beach, YOU were restricted and pulling extra duty!!! E3 SHITBIRD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BOB,
I don’t think in terms of your sexual orientation (frankly, I don’t care)…but since you are bringing it up, can I ask why you want to?
Comment by marks— 2/23/06 @ 7:03 pm [OH, marks, soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo sensitive!! Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo “Brokeback Mountain”!!!!]
JCH,
Of all the people I read on this board, you are indeed the least of them. Go wrap yourself around your white robe and pray that the gasoline you dribbled around the cross somehow saturated the self-same KKK robe…don’t hesitate with that match…
Marks:
Back atcha with the strawman
“Why would there have to be a choice? Keep an unqualified individual from voting. Allow an eligible person their right. Seems simple and unencumbering to me.”
This is so obvious, I can’t believe I’m going to try to explain it. Le tme start by saying, don’t you think the legislature had your view in mind when making the law? Course they did. Then reality set in, and they realized that it would either be too costly (prolly becuz the Republicans had gutted the budget, ironically) or just not practicable to do it the way you suggest. So, they did the best they could and erred on the side of the voter’s right to, you know, vote. (As a bonus, they probably also wrote the law the way they did to encourage voting, to make it as easy as possible for people to vote, reckoning [rightly, IMHO] that even the slightest hurdles would keep the little people out of the voting booth).
Finally, with a Republican Secretary of State, I wonder why no valid challenges have been brought to the current voting laws? I also wonder why the voting laws haven’t been changed by the state legislature, if they are so terrible? Probably cause the legislators realize any attempt would be recognized by the voters as disenfranchisement, and those legislators would find them selves unemployed. Hence, these spurious initiatives.
Goldy, what a load of bs
Are you against 1 person 1 vote? I guess that concept escapes you..
@43: Well, since we are playing 20 questions, answer this one: Why do all dead people vote republican? Why do felons vote overwhelmingly for republicans? Perhaps Dino Rossi can look into this. He appears to have a lot of free time these days. It’s time he did something useful for a change.
Oh, and don’t forget this: The concept of one person one vote was instigated by those traitors on the Warren Court. Or did you forget?
@43: Let me amend that to “liberal traitors”. Oh, the irony.
Larry,
Ah doesn’t unnerstant this:
(prolly becuz the Republicans had gutted the budget, ironically)
Umm, when did the Legislature, with both houses controlled by Republicans, in the state of Washington, gut the budget?
Marks@various. If you read Goldy’s initial post, and Noemie Maxwell’s, you realize that the legality, or non-legality of the initiative is moot. Just as was the two million dollar pr campaign leading to the defeat in Chelan. It is a spoiler action. Pure and simple. Yes it’s possible for the Rethugs to have bad lawyers,even amusing to think so, but it is more likely they have the worst intentions rather than incompetence as their method.
This initiative gives them a loudspeaker platform for more of the same wingnut blather about voter fraud. It would be well for anyone who wishes to defend our system to get out in front in condemning this move.
38 – marks
Well, I guess it seems obvious to me. Issues that involve Gay and Lesbian folks seem to swirl never endingly in the current political vapors.
Like it or not – a long trend which does not seem to slow much, as the fanatics from the religious right make so much hay off my back.
No problem being out for me, let all posters know there is a real one here, certified expert, not operating with second hand assumptions, however well intended.
Goldy,
You think an initiative about voter re-registering is going to turn out the Republican base in Washington? Wow, that’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard this week.
If any initiative is going to draw conservatives to the polls, its got to be Eyman’s gay-rights people’s choice measure. Duh!
38-Be a plaintiff. Could be fun.
So, dinn’t happen? I’m shocked…
don’t you think the legislature had your view in mind
I doubt it.
they realized that it would either be too costly
And now money is the issue?
just not practicable to do it the way you suggest.
How’d I suggest? I suggested they allow eligible voters vote.
Finally, with a Republican Secretary of State, I wonder why no valid challenges have been brought to the current voting laws?
So you admit to the ultimate strawman: A Republican SOS. Thank you. Good night…
Dear Patrick @ 49,
I fear Mr. Eyeman has finally mastered the art of catching the troughs as opposed to the crests of the political waves sweeping this state. Assuming he can even get it on the ballot, the “anti-gay” measure will most likely prove to be a dismal failure, and may well doom Mr. Eyeman to the irrelevance he so well deserves. Republican candidates in this state in swing or dem. areas will run from this stinking turkey as fast as their little free market legs will carry them.
As far as the gopper “base” is concerned, the light may come on some time. The goppers have played them for fools since 1968.
@ 49
Eyman didn’t get a solid ring of endorsement from Tebelius in The Stranger… http://www.thestranger.com/sea.....?oid=30698
A big issue leading up to November is likely to be gay rights. Does your party support Tim Eyman’s attempts to repeal the gay civil rights bill?
The party is taking no position publicly on any of the initiatives right now.
Do you see a way in which the Republican Party would come out against Eyman’s repeal measures?
I don’t see a way that they would come out against them. But I don’t know that they would come out for them.
Patrick @49,
You know what…? You’re wrong. Apart from the party leadership and the right-wing fringe, most Republicans are not pro-discrimination.
Eyman’s initiative is about making discrimination legal. It will lose big, if it gets on the ballot at all.
My friend is a gun-toting, Hillary-hating, tax-not-liking rural guy who wears flannel (not because it’s fashionable, but because in S. King Co., it’s f-ing cold!)…
And he said the other day “There ain’t nothing wrong with being a gay, or a lesbian. We ought to just let those people be and treat ’em normal”
He’s your base, and he’s “not too into” this initiative. After all, this is WA, not NE, MS, or WV.
Goldy @54
You are my hero (Okay, that is a bit over the top…but you earned it, mon frer…)
Finally, with a Republican Secretary of State, I wonder why no valid challenges have been brought to the current voting laws?
So you admit to the ultimate strawman: A Republican SOS. Thank you. Good night…
Comment by marks— 2/23/06 @ 8:46 pm
Sam Reed is a republican in the same manner as Zell Miller is a democrat.
RUFUS,
Sorry, he’s a Republican. Do you demand satisfaction in the same fashion Zell Miller gave? Won’t happen til 2008…if then.
And why is it a moderate Republican is under fire? Is it that he knows how stupid the base can be? That people who have knowledge can fuzz the ridiculous? That smart is more important than stupid? Thank you, Sam Reed…You reinforce, while RUFUS clogs…
Sam Reed blew his cover when he let KC add ballots in the 3rd recount. He is a RINO. He botched the election and handed it to
Chrissy.
RUFUS @60
He did no such bullshit. He did his fucking job…Are you saying the job of SOS is beyond what it truly is?
The Reagan and both Bush administrations are more like PR efforts than Presidencies. Boy, we’re standing tall now with 20 million citizens beneath the poverty level!
In what Republicans are calling a ”high-profile gaffe,” a Democrat running for Congress in Ohio’s 6th Congressional District has been disqualified from running in the Democratic primary. State Sen. Charlie Wilson failed to get the minimum number of petition signatures, election officials said on Wednesday. /break/ Wilson needed 50 signatures of registered Democratic voters, and although he submitted 96 signatures a few days before the filing deadline, only 46 were found to be valid
Bwahahahaha. Maybe he thought he was in King County or New Jersey where such a technicality wouldn’t matter but I suspect that the Dems will challenge this ruling, ask for an extension, etc.
[I’m surprised the invalid signatures weren’t the deceased or imprisoned. 50 out of 96 signatures were frauds, Sounds about right for Democrats!!!!!!]
The Reagan and both Bush administrations are more like PR efforts than Presidencies. Boy, we’re standing tall now with 20 million citizens beneath the poverty level!
Comment by Rev. A.A. Tappman: Anababtist— 2/23/06 @ 9:59 pm {maybe jobs picking tomatoes or strawberries might be a good idea for the twenty million.]
When he let KC add to the recount and did not let the other counties pull back their certifications to count in the same manner than yes he didn’t do his fucking job you dip shit. Are you donks just genetically corrupt or fucking what? Geeesh.
RUFUS @65
I don’t know what you are talking about. Spell it out. I am dyslexic, so whatever numbers you toss out, I will kick them…
What’s the socialist position on the Sonics arena deal?
The 94 found absentee ballots in KC were quite amazing weren’t they?
rufus
is
a
s-o-r-e
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooser
The 94 ballots counted in KC means that at least 175 absentee ballots were not counted in other counties with everything being equal. This means that there is not way to know for sure who won the election. It was botched.
I admit it was hard to take losing after the 3rd recount by just 129 votes. It not like you got your ass whipped by 3.5 or 4 million votes. Wait that was Bush over Kerry. Nevermind.
Belltowner,
I get a bit rumpled thinking YO will say “LOOOOOOOOOOOSER”,
I do jump the gun a bit, eh?
Evergreen Fraudulent Foundation
BELLTOWNER YOUR A DING DONG.LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSER.
RUFUS @71,
And that should be a comfort zone…Why are you even bothering with the state numbers? Nationally, what happened? At some point, who cares?
Hi, YO!
You ever seen Radar 3?
Nationally Bush did win by more but we dont make a big deal out of it because the election was never in doubt. I know as a republican we actually have to get 51% of the legitimate vote to overcome the fraud. Oh well, just learn to live with it.
Rufus: Do you think the 2020 Olympic Athletes should be only the children of the 2000 Olympians? Think carefully. Because the answer is the reason Warren Buffet is in favor of a crippling inheritance tax on large estates.
We don’t need a monied aristocracy in this supposed “meritocracy” that you bogusly promote.
Frank Blethen has made the only credible argument I’ve ever heard against taxation of large estates. Not that I think the Seattle Times is the best daily newspaper Seattle could have, but that I know damned well that it’ll be a hell of a lot worse if (when?) it ends up under the ownership of Rupert Murdoch. There are no doubt plenty of family-owned businesses large and small that are facing an uncertain future after “the old man” checks out, although in most cases it’s due to the heirs fighting over what’s left than anything else. I don’t know where you’d draw the line, but generally when a company breaks up or changes ownership, employees end up suffering.
To get back to Goldy’s original subject (Ahem!) might it be possible that Evergreen Freeper Foundation’s real purpose may be to use this as a springboard for a lawsuit? The Robers/Alito/Scalia/Thomas/Souter court would take it as an excuse to overturn the 1993 law, right after they’ve reversed Roe V. Wade and declared it’s all right for Curious George to keep listening to our phone calls.
14
“Why is the left so afraid of getting illegitimate voters off the roles? Why do they want to make it easier to register and vote illegitimatly? I can think of only one reason… Comment by litmas— 2/23/06 @ 4:45 pm”
Why is the right so afraid of getting legitimate voters off the roles?
Why do they want to make it harder to register and vote legally? I can think of only one reason … they know they can’t win an honest election.
Seems to be that the EFF is shooting themselves in the foot again. If all of the voters in the state were required to re-register the group of voters that would be the most upset and most likely to say ‘to hell with it’ would be the senior citizens. I can just imagine Washington State telling my father to re-register after not missing an election in 58 years! Leave it to the wingnuts to cut their own throats, they are experts on that subject!
“Despite what ‘tort reform’ proponents promised lawmakers, tort law limits enacted since the liability insurance crisis of the mid-1980’s have not lowered insurance rates …. Just as the liability insurance crisis was found to be driven by the insurance underwriting cycle and not by a tort law cost explosion as many insurance companies and others had claimed, the ‘tort reform’ remedy pushed by these advocates failed … legal system restrictions are based on a false predicate. ‘Tort reforms’ do not produce lower insurance costs or rates.” http://www.centerjd.org/PremiumDeceit%20.pdf
re 83: Then the only reason they want to limit judgements, RR, is to deny justice — like the fascist bastards they are.
84
Nah, it isn’t about fascism, they want your money.
Goldy thanks for pointing this out – although news that republicans are liars is hardly news. But here’s what I want to know; why don’t we come up with our own abuse of the process? What specious initiatives can we file that have no chance of winning but which force the GOP into a hole?
Acquisitive little bastards, eh?
#86 I have always been in favor of elevating white collar crimes of a certain magnitude (Silvarado, Enron ) to capital offenses.
Hell, those fucktards are so into either executing or killing, let’s add white collar criminals to the death roles.
Here’s the deal on this vorter registration gig. Back in 2004, King County Elections was so cock-sure Gregoire would win that they ran a sloppy count. So, when, much to their surprise, Rossi won, it scared the piss out of ’em. So, they had to go back and find votes that they previously ignored so that their girl would win.
Well, they did just that, and took the election. It may be that Gregoire DID win all the votes KCE says she did, but the whole thing reeks of corruption and incompetance in the eyes of the rest of the state. That’s why EFF is going to such extremes to try to re-register all voters. KCE is corrupt and incompetant, and the folks that don’t live in the Surreal Society of King County want to reform the system so that KCE can’t pull another stunt like they did in 2004. That’s the bottom line to all this crap.
Now, everyone: SHUT-UP!
Idiot@89 To put it on KCRE is just forwarding the wingnut agenda. Gregoire ran a weak campaign. She was ill, coming off of chemotherapy, and took some very poor advice.
However, that’s done. She’s coming back with a vengeance and doing a fine job. . .easily re-electable now.
As to the count, the fact that there was n o appeal to bridges
decision, besides the wingnut grumbles. tells it all.
89, your idea of the American political process is, “SHUT UP” ?
You think all you have to say: “here is the deal” and you expect us to say, oh, well thanks for clearing that up!
IF voting and registration is a disgrace, it is a national disgrace.
I see your Gregoire, and raise you a Bush/Cheney.
Hey, did I scare Sven off? Yeah me!
@18 – Tree Frog Farmer,
I use “litmas” because I mean “litmas”. Before you take your shallow, ignorant, non-self-effacing comments out of your butt and throw it out here, make sure you know what you are talking about. I do not assume to be any kind of test for anything, much less one that makes determinations from only one single indicator…
Jackass@93 Now, now, don’t get yer knickers in a twist, twit. . .
F*cking idiots @ 90 & 91:
I wonder, is the same fool having a bad day under various names, or has the weather changed and “a stupidity front” moved in. . . . . .
F*cking idiots at 90 and 91:
WHEN ARE YOU TWO F*UCKING SH*T-FOR-BRAINS GONNA GET IT? It’s the appearance of corruption/incompetance that has everyone with their underwear in at twist, twits! KC ran a sloppy count out of arrogance and incompetance. No on, except the looney-tunes of Seattle, thinks KC elections are run properly.
You corksuckers got your girl in, but she won’t be around after 2008. The independents are gonna go out of their way to insure they vote against Queen Chrissy.
The fact that you fools can’t put it down, and deal with the fact that a Bipartisan package of reforms was enacted reveal you for what you are WINGNUT LOSERS.
dummy@95/97: (What happened there, brain hiccup?)
A fake, manufactured appearance isn’t the real thing. the ‘appearance of corruption/incompetance’ that you keep babbling about is just the loony right echo chamber saying the same thing over and over, trying to convince by repition… its hard to respect anyone who falls for it.
It amuses me to see wingnuts compain about “arrogance and incompetance” at KCRE. If it weren’t for that, Rossi would just be the loser in the initial count of the 2004 election.
The only reason it appeared that Rossi had “won” the election was the uncounted votes in KC.
OK then,
What just how do we clean up the roles of those who should not be registered to vote?
The fact is there are people who are registered that should not be.
And don’t give me any “disenfranchise” BS …. people who are not LEGALLY registered shouldn’t be able to vote.
GBS Update: He has been driven from HorsesAss like a Muslim from a Pork Bar-B-Q!!!!!
JackBurton@101″The fact is there are people who are registered that should not be.”
What, Jack, first roundup the Jews, then the gypsies, then the mentally incompetent. . . .?
Perhaps you’re showing more than you wish to, Jack.
The process to challenge a voter’s registration is a knowledge based process, despite Sotelo’s attempt to pervert it. If you KNOW a voter is illegally registered, you can present the facts to challenge that voter. Without facts you have gaseous vaporizations and looneytunes wingnut rhetoric.
That 2004 election for governor looked a little fishy to me, and I don’t particularly care for either of the main political parties. The way they kept finding votes looked bad. I guess going forward we should strive to be squeaky-clean in the election process. So sense looking at the 2004 election for more than anything but a wake-up call to run a fair vote count.
Too hot for GBS [aka Hillary] here!! He is probably eating lunch [alone] at the local Denny’s, crying in his cherry coke!! GBS laments, “Why couldn’t I be the officer? Why can’t I be the one in charge? Life is soooooooooo unfair!! I’m old and ugly and I’m still a SHITBIRD! I couldn’t even make it on Horsesass.com!”
Just another Chicken Hawk at 106:
Further proof that he is jealous of people who get to go outside. His Mom doesn’t allow him to, especially since the incident with the neighbors’ sheep.
Belltowner:
Thanks for posting the Stranger interview with Tebelius. I don’t think she answered a single question that was asked of her. This style of sterling leadership is exactly what the GOP deserves.
JCH:
If I were faced with these two choices I would take B over A any day of the week.
A) Naval Officer who WASHED-OUT of flight school and became a Supply Officer in the Gator Navy.
or
B) Enlisted man who became a SEAL.
B) Has no shame, and really has NO REGRETS.
Whereas A) means having to live your whole life knowing you couldn’t hack it where other men succeeded. Always wondering “what if I were good enough? What could I have done?”
Death before dishonor. JCH, you will never fully know the meaning of that creed. For you will die a thousand deaths, and I will only die but once.
BTW, you were clearly caught lying about living in Hawaii. Now, everyone knows you’re an unqualified liar. You have ZERO credibility. The best part is; I’m the one who destroyed you.
WASHOUT.
My comment turned into a post of its own. View my response here: http://spiketheunderdog.blogspot.com/
101
“just how do we clean up the roles of those who should not be registered to vote”
Your question has already been answered by the legislature. Create a statewide voter data base. Provide more funding to counties to maintain their voter rolls. And let professionals do their job — “cleaning” voter rolls is not a job for amateurs.
105
“That 2004 election for governor looked a little fishy to me … Comment by Libertarian— 2/24/06 @ 11:19 am”
So what? The 2000 and 2004 elections for president looked more than a little fishy to me, but at some point you have to settle the question of who gets to occupy the office and move on.
86
“What specious initiatives can we file that have no chance of winning but which force the GOP into a hole?”
Let’s file an initiative declaring the Republican Party is an illegal conspiracy to undermine our national security.
at some point you have to settle the question of who gets to occupy the office and move on.
Comment by Roger Rabbit— 2/24/06 @ 2:28 pm
That’s what I’m doing.
geez, rufus, you should have paid attention. You can’t recount after you certify. The other counties had certified; King hadn’t. End of story.
It seems to me we chould understand that a “straw man” is, so that the term will not be misused as it so often is. I refer, for example, to marks saying that a reference to a GOP SecState is a “Straw man.” I don’t think I get that, but anyway:
A straw-man argument is the practice of refuting a weaker argument than an opponent actually offers. To “set up a straw man” or “set up a straw-man argument” is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to your opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is also a logical fallacy, since the argument actually presented by your opponent has not been refuted, only a weaker argument.
One can set up a straw man in the following ways:
Present the opponent’s argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
Present a misrepresentation of the opponent’s position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent’s actual position has been refuted.
Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person’s arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
Thank you.
litmas @ http://www.horsesass.org/my-co.....php?p=1410
“Why is the left so afraid of getting illegitimate voters off the roles?”
BTW, they’re “rolls.” Homonyms are hard, aren’t they? Who says that anyone is “afraid” of getting illegitimate voters off the voting rolls? I think you would need to present some sort of proof of that assertion before we should dignify it with a response or refutation.
“Why do they want to make it easier to register and vote illegitimatly?”
I think many people support making it easier to for eligible voters register in order to encourage voting, when only something under of those eligible do vote. But don’t try to conflate that with an effort to encourage illegal voting. If you wish to assert that this is true, you should support that assertion with, you know, evidence.
“I can think of only one reason� ”
Goodness, then it’s a good thing that the limits of your intellect are not our guide.
Jach Burton @ http://www.horsesass.org/my-co.....php?p=1410
“What just how do we clean up the roles of those who should not be registered to vote?”
BTW, it’s “rolls.”
How do we do it? We do it like this:
Merged duplicate registrations before and between elections.- Mail 1.1 million voters new registration cards and ask voters to partner with KC to clean our voter rolls (from the response, thousands of voters reported duplication registrations and 73,000 voters were put on inactive status).
- Remove names of deceased voters from the voter rolls.
- Challenge and cancel the registrations of felons.
- Prosecute those who vote twice (seven people were prosecuted for voting twice in the 2004 General Election). If someone does vote twice, forward their case to the Prosecuting Attorney.
These are the things that KCE is doing now to keep the voter rolls clean. Also, the State of Washington is following federal law to develop a centralized voter registration database (VRDB) that contains the name and registration information of every eligible voter in the state. It is publicly available, and it undercgoes continuous maintenance.
All this is possible somehow without removing every voter from the rolls. Imagine.
let me code it right to see if it works.
How do we do it? We do it like this:
Hmmm, no unordered lists allowed in site HTML.
If anyone thinks that the EFF proposal, if implemented, would “solve” the “problem” of invalid registrations, really try to think about it for a minute.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that we take a big ol’ broom and remove (or render “inactive”) ALL voters, and start up a big Unspecified-Ethnicity Fire Drill force every voter in the state to re-register. Let’s even assume, contrary to what I think are reasonable expectations, that this is done with every single previously legitimate voter re-registering. Let’s ignore for a moment all of the non-registered elgigible voters.
The moment that process if finished; no before that process is finished, people will begin their messy ways: dying, getting married, moving within/into/out of the state, getting divroced, becoming citizens, becoming convicted felons, changing their names, and all the other things people do every day.
Q: How long will it be before some registration or other in our statewide DB will be incorrect? How long will it be before some registration or other in the DB will be “illegitimate” (let’s say Lori Sotelo is convicted of a felony, for instance)?
A one-time fix is a convenient stalking horse, but it is a costly, unrealistic fraud that will not mitigate or solve this problem. Robust and accountable maintenance procedures seem to me to be a far superior approach.
Its the second time I visited your web site. Looks interesting.