Welcome to Mountain Buzz, the ultimate paddlers community. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to most of our features. By joining our community (it's FREE) you will have access to post topics, send Private Messages (PM), respond to polls, upload content, connect with other paddlers and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.
Cayo,
In regards to the election fraud, I'm not sure where the quote came from but I think it is sums it up well, "The media is fine with rocking the boat, but is afraid to question the entire ocean".
I'll repost the election links for anyone who missed them. I was surprised there weren't any responses either. Perhaps the nsa has blocked them and they don't even show up on anyone elses computer?
The notion of having the secretary of state, who's in charge of conducting elections, serving at the same time in the role as the state's party chairman is a huge conflict-of-interest. That kind of thing would never fly in the government contracting/procurement process and I can't believe its allowed in the electoral process. Obviously the notion of procuring a fair election isn't nearly as important as procuring goods and services for the government.
As for preventing it from happening again, we can demand that our elected representatives change the laws that allow it. It may be a constitutional issue though, in which case changing it will be much more difficult.
-AH
__________________
Nothing in the world is more yielding and gentle than water. Yet it has no equal for conquering the resistant and tough. The flexible can overcome the unbending; the soft can overcome the hard. - Lao Tse
Even I was disturbed at what I read in those election issues. And stunned at how little media that got. Of all the tripe I've spouted here since January or whenever I started, nothing truly disheartened me until I read those.
Crap, I don't do well when my idealism is dealt a serious blow.
Yes, those kinds of conflicts of interests have to be terminated immediately. It's starting to look like there's a real loophole in how elections get "run" in this country, and to me, nothing is more serious than an electorate that believes its votes are being discounted before or after they're cast.
Well, I stand corrected - what's more disturbing is that this seems to be happening...
__________________
The real problem fundamentalists have with the theory of evolution is that it wasn't written on a sheepskin in the Bronze Age. Evolution is something science can't explain to willfully irrational people.
After reading that, how can any one say they are republican and say they stand for old fashion values? Where are lying, cheating, and dishonesty a American value?
Where were democratic leaders to contest and fight for the moral good of the nation?
That's idealistic too. With special interest groups lobbying to both parties, neither are concerned with moral values. But republican values are old-fashioned values in the sense that lying, cheating, and dishonesty are Christian values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhere
After reading that, how can any one say they are republican and say they stand for old fashion values? Where are lying, cheating, and dishonesty a American value?
Where were democratic leaders to contest and fight for the moral good of the nation?
Doesn't anyone know how to use google? It took me all of about 7 minutes to find these three! Doubt if it will change any minds, though. Go back to believing whatever you want!
The numerous google articles on both sides of the argument identify, as Helio said, a loophole in the process that needs to be fixed. The articles you list only claim that Bush would have won anyway, despite polling place irregularities. None of them deny the existence of those irregularities. The real problem is that there is an electorate who wants to take part in a fair, honest, efficient democratic process- to have its voice heard as promised by the constitution.
Regardless of intentional fraud or incompetent mishandling, the government has the obligation to develop and ensure an electoral system that is accurate, consistent, and squelches even the rumor of fraud. It is our responsibility to hold them accountable for that. Few, if any, changes were made in the system after the obvious debacles in 2000 and 2004.
What will be done before this year's election?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boatnbike
Too bogus (and busy) for me, and I'm sure many others, to reply. But, OK, here you go...
Doesn't anyone know how to use google? It took me all of about 7 minutes to find these three! Doubt if it will change any minds, though. Go back to believing whatever you want!
On the first link, I couldn't find out who "Lexta" is, although he/she questions others phd's I could find no resume for him/her. Looking through the site it is easy to distinguish his M.O. (he lists them): pro-life, anti-gay, right wing conservative...
So I'm pretty sure I'll take the calculations of someone with a degree and who isn't hiding behind a website and obviously biased.
The second link leads to the "Opinions" section of the web site. While Russ Baker is definitely a left leaning guy, there is a lot wrong with his article. Scrutinization of Russ Baker's Scrutinization
A lot of Russ' findings start with "probably", in other words, he couldn't disprove the accusation. Not his best work.
The last one I couldn't open.
To say that the pre-election polls prove that the exit polls were inaccurate seems quite a stretch to me. To compare likely voters to actual voters adds more variation into the count. Also, who is more reliant on just a cell phone these days R or D? I think that alone would account for the high R pre and high exit poll D counts. Which again points to fraud.
-d
__________________
"I think I handled my alcohol pretty well considering how drunk I was." -Cousin Dan
Linear Mode
