Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 123
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Thanx for ruining a perfectly good fantasy!

    sorry, the real world is a painful painful place sometimes ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    sorry, the real world is a painful painful place sometimes ...
    That's why I divorce myself from reality as much as possible. Only good things in Monkeyville!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    That's why I divorce myself from reality as much as possible. Only good things in Monkeyville!
    earlier I almost made reference to your remark: "appointing the Pope to the SCOTUS"

    but I showed great restraint...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4.    #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    if elections are a truly sacred right in a democracy -- and one man one vote means anything -- the recount that the Forida Supreme court ordered should have been finished under neutral observation.

    My tangent btw, was in response to the comment that the supreme conservatives are somehow more repectful of original intent: "originalist perspective".

    The 2000 election ruling where the supreme conservatives state that their decision would have no weight of precedent, disproved that absolutely.
    Just the opposite I think.

    It was not the originalist perspective for the supreme court to decide elections. But it was the originalist intent to resolve legal disputes.

    In as much as parties raised the dispute, it became the scope of the SCOTUS to intercede. However, by disavowing precedent, they preserve the original intent not to have the Supreme Court decide the election.

    In other words, if somehow a similar situation arose, the litigants could not count on the 2000 decision (which was specific to those circumstances) to be the basis for the next.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    if elections are a truly sacred right in a democracy -- and one man one vote means anything -- the recount that the Forida Supreme court ordered should have been finished under neutral observation.
    If it were a true counting of the votes, we are in agreement. However that's not what I or the world saw - we saw an interpretation of possible intent - that's where I have the problem.
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    In other words, if somehow a similar situation arose, the litigants could not count on the 2000 decision (which was specific to those circumstances) to be the basis for the next.
    I'm confused --

    I always assumed that the one of the important predicates to our system of law going back to anglo saxon times was the significance and respect given to precedent in deciding subsequent cases where similar facts and circumstances exist.

    That there can never be "one of" court rulings.

    That there should not be legislation written so as to benefit or effect a specific corporation or person.

    Ethically and philsophically this would seem self evident -- but as was recently seen in the schiavo tragedy, the conservatives in control of our laws don't share this point of view.
    Last edited by BARYE; 07/02/2005 at 12:41 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    If it were a true counting of the votes, we are in agreement. However that's not what I or the world saw - we saw an interpretation of possible intent - that's where I have the problem.
    I think the biggest problem I had with this was when Gore refused to recount all the state and tried to only recount Dem heavy counties and especially when he tried to throw out all absentee votes because they were mostly Military, which are historically Rep leaning.

    .............But that is old history and off topic.
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I think the biggest problem I had with this was when Gore refused to recount all the state and tried to only recount Dem heavy counties and especially when he tried to throw out all absentee votes because they were mostly Military, which are historically Rep leaning.
    This is on my you gotta be kidding me list
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I think the biggest problem I had with this was when Gore refused to recount all the state and tried to only recount Dem heavy counties and especially when he tried to throw out all absentee votes because they were mostly Military, which are historically Rep leaning.

    .............But that is old history and off topic.

    OT, but I have to respond --

    You're very right that Gore made a tactical error in not asking for a statewide recount (I think it had something to do with the asking litigant being resposible for cost ???? or something, don't remember). Bad decision no matter the reason.

    His legal/political team made lots of tactical errors in that travesty. (see the documentary: "Unprecedented").

    Regarding the military absentee votes -- the republicans successfully managed to get accepted into the recount many many ballots (hundreds??) that were post marked AFTER election day -- clearly illegal ballots that were ultimately included in bush's final tally.

    In the retired Jewish sections of Florida -- where the elderly voters there are loyal reliable democrats -- 5,330 of them mistakenly voted for both hardcore conservative Pat Buchanan as well as Gore -- invalidating their votes because of the confusing butterfly ballot used.

    For bush's brother be in control of the state, for bush's state campaign manager (katherine harris) be in charge of the election itself in Florida ???

    I'm sorry, Florida was so close and so corrupted for so many reasons -- I can't think that any patroitic conservative could be proud of how bush became president.


    By Joel Engelhardt and Scott McCabe
    The Palm Beach Post
    Sunday, March 11, 2001


    "...The review of more than 19,000 punch cards reveals how a confusing presidential ballot forced the country into a contentious 37-day standoff in the courts and in the streets. Those few thousand votes examined are but a tiny slice of the 6 million cast in Florida, but in such a tight race, they were the key to the state's 25 electoral votes being awarded to Bush, giving him enough to win the presidency.

    The ballots show that 5,330 Palm Beach County residents, many of them in Democratic strongholds, invalidated their ballot cards by punching chads for both Gore and Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan, whose hole on the punch card appeared just above Gore's.

    The ballots also show that another 2,908 voters punched Gore's name along with that of Socialist David McReynolds, the candidate whose hole on the card appeared just below Gore's. Both Buchanan's and McReynolds' names appeared on the right page of the two-page ballot; Gore's was on the left..."

    http://www.theomandel.com/bloopers/N...ionObvious.htm
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    OT, but I have to respond --

    You're very right that Gore made a tactical error in not asking for a statewide recount (I think it had something to do with the asking litigant being resposible for cost ???? or something, don't remember). Bad decision no matter the reason.

    His legal/political team made lots of tactical errors in that travesty. (see the documentary: "Unprecedented").

    Regarding the military absentee votes -- the republicans successfully managed to get accepted into the recount many many (hundreds??) of ballots that were post marked AFTER election day -- clearly illegal ballots that were included in bush's final tally.

    In the retired Jewish sections of Florida -- where the elderly voters there are loyal reliable democrats -- 5,330 of them mistakenly voted for both hardcore conservative Pat Buchanan as well as Gore -- invalidating their votes because of the confusing butterfly ballot used.

    For bush's brother be in control of the state, for bush's state campaign manager (katherine harris) be in charge of the election itself in Florida ???

    I'm sorry, Florida was so close and so corrupted for so many reasons -- I can't think that any patroitic conservative could be proud of how bush became president.


    By Joel Engelhardt and Scott McCabe
    The Palm Beach Post
    Sunday, March 11, 2001


    "...The review of more than 19,000 punch cards reveals how a confusing presidential ballot forced the country into a contentious 37-day standoff in the courts and in the streets. Those few thousand votes examined are but a tiny slice of the 6 million cast in Florida, but in such a tight race, they were the key to the state's 25 electoral votes being awarded to Bush, giving him enough to win the presidency.

    The ballots show that 5,330 Palm Beach County residents, many of them in Democratic strongholds, invalidated their ballot cards by punching chads for both Gore and Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan, whose hole on the punch card appeared just above Gore's.

    The ballots also show that another 2,908 voters punched Gore's name along with that of Socialist David McReynolds, the candidate whose hole on the card appeared just below Gore's. Both Buchanan's and McReynolds' names appeared on the right page of the two-page ballot; Gore's was on the left..."

    http://www.theomandel.com/bloopers/N...ionObvious.htm
    And remind me again of the results of the many independent recounts that were conducted AFTER the election? - seems it didn't matter who counted the result was the same
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    In the retired Jewish sections of Florida -- where the elderly voters there are loyal reliable democrats -- 5,330 of them mistakenly voted for both hardcore conservative Pat Buchanan as well as Gore -- invalidating their votes because of the confusing butterfly ballot used.
    I don't buy this arguement. Not that I want to prevent people from voting, but if you can't figure out a ballot, let alone double check it before dropping it in the box, whose fault is this?

    Maybe it's time to stick to shuffleboard.





    Note the friggin' arrow POINTING to the correct hole.

    HOW HARD IS THIS TO FIGURE OUT?!?!
    Last edited by Insertion; 07/01/2005 at 04:52 PM.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  12. #52  
    I've never actually seen that balot. I was led to believe by the news reports it was much more confusing the way it was put together.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    I've never actually seen that balot. I was led to believe by the news reports it was much more confusing the way it was put together.
    That would suggest a Liberal bias...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I don't buy this arguement. Not that I want to prevent people from voting, but if you can't figure out a ballot, let alone double check it before dropping it in the box, whose fault is this?

    Maybe it's time to stick to shuffleboard.

    yes being old, unfamiliar with them new fangled butterfly ballots, and maybe having bad eyesight -- that's a good reason for disenfranchising them.

    I know whole swaths of this country whose voters ought be disenfranchised on account of stupidity !

    Our democracy does not guarantee any side their outcome (well unless your kid brother is the Guv anyway).

    What it should ensure is the equal opportunity for everyone to cast their votes under similar circumstances, obstacles, and duress --- you should not have some places where surplus voting machines mean instant voting, and others where people had to wait 12 hours in cold rain in order to vote. You should not have a ballot whose poor construction makes mistakes inherently far far greater than those used in precincts where simple voting machines are utilized.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    I've never actually seen that balot. I was led to believe by the news reports it was much more confusing the way it was put together.
    of course you were - how else could they explain a bush win
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    yes being old, unfamiliar with them new fangled butterfly ballots, and maybe having bad eyesight -- that's a good reason for disenfranchising them.

    I know whole swaths of this country whose voters ought be disenfranchised on account of stupidity !

    Our democracy does not guarantee any side their outcome (well unless your kid brother is the Guv anyway).

    What it should ensure is the equal opportunity for everyone to cast their votes under similar circumstances, obstacles, and duress --- you should not have some places where surplus voting machines mean instant voting, and others where people had to wait 12 hours in cold rain in order to vote. You should not have a ballot whose poor construction makes mistakes inherently far far greater than those used in precincts where simple voting machines are utilized.
    Jesse?? Jesse Jackson????? is that you????
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I'm sorry, Florida was so close and so corrupted for so many reasons -- I can't think that any patroitic conservative could be proud of how bush became president.
    Kind of reminds me of the Gov race in my own home state, when it was discovered that dead people were voting in Dem heavy counties, and with a race within 123 votes, that was not an issue with the Dems:

    Believe me there is plenty of ammo on both sides to be ashamed of....But I really don't want this topic to hijack this thread.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 07/02/2005 at 06:08 AM.
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Note the friggin' arrow POINTING to the correct hole.

    HOW HARD IS THIS TO FIGURE OUT?!?!

    I'm guessing that it was an accidental omission to not mention the INSTRUCTION at the beginning of the ballot:

    TO BE SURE TO PUNCH EACH PAGE !!!

    But seriously, if you look at your photo you can see how both the names above and below Gore's were accdentally punched by shakey old hands
    Last edited by BARYE; 07/02/2005 at 12:46 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I'm guessing that it was an accidental ommission to not mention the INSTRUCTION at the beginning of the ballot:

    TO BE SURE TO PUNCH EACH PAGE !!!
    So if you're Jewish and an arrow is right next to the name Pat Buchanan, you can't figure out you don't want to punch that hole????
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    yes being old, unfamiliar with them new fangled butterfly ballots, and maybe having bad eyesight -- that's a good reason for disenfranchising them.

    I know whole swaths of this country whose voters ought be disenfranchised on account of stupidity !
    This is the most assinine arguement of all. I doubt anyone even heard the term "disenfranchised" before 2000.

    Definition:
    disenfranchise
    v : deprive of voting rights

    Their rights were NOT deprived. Did they not get to vote??

    Coming up with a million excuses for stupidity and/or laziness does not mean they were disenfranchised.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions