Kerry's response to Bush's speech

[Warehouse21]

You know, it really amazes me more and how anyone can support Bush this year. If anyone kept CNN on after Bush got done lying, they saw John Kerry's response. When Kerry responded, the viewer heard figures like 112,000, 61%, 237,000, 9,000...you heard statistics, information, or what Bush would so brilliantly call "fuzzy math". When the Republicans speak, you hear "We've improved healthcare". You hear, "We respect our working class." You never hear any support for any of their arguments. None, whatsoever. The only statistic I heard all night from Bush is that 10 million people were gonna vote in the Afghanistan elections. That was the only one.

And let me make a point about "imaginary crimes". Bush mentioned in his speech how Saddam Hussein accused the person whose hands he cut off of "imaginary crimes". Well, W knows a bit about imagnary crimes, being that many black voters in Florida had been labeled as felons, making them ineligible to vote. In reality, as it was recently revealed, only 18% of those accused actually committed felonies. So if Bush knows what's good for his campaign, he'll shut up about "imaginary crimes".

[Dancing Ants]

You know, it really amazes me more and how anyone can support Bush this year. If anyone kept CNN on after Bush got done lying, they saw John Kerry's response. When Kerry responded, the viewer heard figures like 112,000, 61%, 237,000, 9,000...you heard statistics, information, or what Bush would so brilliantly call "fuzzy math". When the Republicans speak, you hear "We've improved healthcare". You hear, "We respect our working class." You never hear any support for any of their arguments. None, whatsoever. The only statistic I heard all night from Bush is that 10 million people were gonna vote in the Afghanistan elections. That was the only one.

And let me make a point about "imaginary crimes". Bush mentioned in his speech how Saddam Hussein accused the person whose hands he cut off of "imaginary crimes". Well, W knows a bit about imagnary crimes, being that many black voters in Florida had been labeled as felons, making them ineligible to vote. In reality, as it was recently revealed, only 18% of those accused actually committed felonies. So if Bush knows what's good for his campaign, he'll shut up about "imaginary crimes".



you're gonna have to back up that thing about the black people.

Just so you know, National Conventions are what we call "preaching to the choir". it's really only to get his people fired up.

[mantra4]

i'm not one of his people... and i'm getting fired up. probably not in the same way they are if ya know what i mean... be back later, i'm gonna go get more fired up

*blazes*

[stimmerman]

you're gonna have to back up that thing about the black people.


In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush's win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state--Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both protegees of Governor Jeb Bush--ordered 57,700 "exfelons," who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.)
Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida's electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1111/is_1822_304/ai_83553508

There are plenty more articles about the incident. Just Google it.

[monkeyman]

In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush's win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state--Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both protegees of Governor Jeb Bush--ordered 57,700 "exfelons," who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.)
Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida's electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1111/is_1822_304/ai_83553508

There are plenty more articles about the incident. Just Google it.

So, basically, they enforced a state law that is also in effect in 14 other states across the country.

Are you saying people who are prohibited from voting by state law should be allowed to remain on voter rolls and allowed to vote?

[ODB4LYFE]

so you got the memo from michael moore?

[Carbon Copy]

anyone else notice how fox news cut off kerry talking after like 2 minutes and went back to the RNC

[stimmerman]

So, basically, they enforced a state law that is also in effect in 14 other states across the country.

Are you saying people who are prohibited from voting by state law should be allowed to remain on voter rolls and allowed to vote?
I gave that link so you could read the article, obviously you didn't.

Two of these "scrub lists," as officials called them, were distributed to counties in the months before the election with orders to remove the voters named. Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida's electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters. Most of the voters (such as "David Butler," a name that appears 77 times in Florida phone books) were selected because their name, gender, birthdate, and race matched--or nearly matched--one of the tens of millions of ex-felons in the United States. Neither DBT nor the state conducted any further research to verify the matches. DBT, which frequently is hired by the F.B.I. to conduct manhunts, originally proposed using address histories and financial records to confirm the names, but the state declined,the cross-checks. In Harris's elections-office files, next to DBT's sophisticated verification plan, there is a handwritten note: "DON'T NEED."

They were taking peoples name off the voter list because their names or race or gender or birthdate nearly matched those of convicted felons. Do you see the problem now?

[ugahairydawgs]

so you got the memo from michael moore?
and drank the kool-aid, apparently.

[barefoot]

So felons are a big voting boost for the Democrats?

[cyberhound]

I gave that link so you could read the article, obviously you didn't.

Two of these "scrub lists," as officials called them, were distributed to counties in the months before the election with orders to remove the voters named. Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida's electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters. Most of the voters (such as "David Butler," a name that appears 77 times in Florida phone books) were selected because their name, gender, birthdate, and race matched--or nearly matched--one of the tens of millions of ex-felons in the United States. Neither DBT nor the state conducted any further research to verify the matches. DBT, which frequently is hired by the F.B.I. to conduct manhunts, originally proposed using address histories and financial records to confirm the names, but the state declined,the cross-checks. In Harris's elections-office files, next to DBT's sophisticated verification plan, there is a handwritten note: "DON'T NEED."

They were taking peoples name off the voter list because their names or race or gender or birthdate nearly matched those of convicted felons. Do you see the problem now?
Can you name one of those people who was denied their legal right to vote when they showed up to cast their ballot?

[gloco]

So felons are a big voting boost for the Democrats?

Are you retarded?

The bastard republicans removed names of voters who were not criminals only because their names matched (or kind of matched) with criminals.

Example:

John Doe: No criminal record, registered voter
Jon M Doe: Criminal record, cannot vote

Both we're removed from the voter rolls. Get it?

[gloco]

Can you name one of those people who was denied their legal right to vote when they showed up to cast their ballot?

:rolleyes:

Give me a break brother, i'd expect more from you.

Google it if you want names. Their was a documentary done on cable tv that had hundreds of minorities who spoke about how they tried to vote and we're not allowed because they were told they were removed from voter lists because they were ex-felons when all of them had clean records. This all occured in Florida during the 2000 elections. Haven't you heard anything about this?

[cyberhound]

:rolleyes:

Give me a break brother, i'd expect more from you.

Google it if you want names. Their was a documentary done on cable tv that had hundreds of minorities who spoke about how they tried to vote and we're not allowed because they were told they were removed from voter lists because they were ex-felons when all of them had clean records. This all occured in Florida during the 2000 elections. Haven't you heard anything about this?
Yes I have, and it's funny that we have people who say those things but not one name of an individual who can show that they were denied their legal right to vote. People can say anything they want on television. Certainly there should be one. And I have googled it before many times over this issue. Perhaps you'd like to give me your google search terms and or a name?

[barefoot]

Are you retarded?

The bastard republicans removed names of voters who were not criminals only because their names matched (or kind of matched) with criminals.

Example:

John Doe: No criminal record, registered voter
Jon M Doe: Criminal record, cannot vote

Both we're removed from the voter rolls. Get it?
Yes I see now, it was a Republican conspiracy. And they checked to see their voting party to if it was

Jon M. Doe (R) can vote
Jon Doe (D) cant vote.

[gloco]

Yes I have, and it's funny that we have people who say those things but not one name of an individual who can show that they were denied their legal right to vote. People can say anything they want on television. Certainly there should be one. And I have googled it before many times over this issue. Perhaps you'd like to give me your google search terms and or a name?

Here you go:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30

Name mentioned in the first paragraph and i'll copy and paste it here:

Kelvin King

I googled it exactly like this:

florida voters +2000 elections +denied to vote

Duh.

So, are you going to contact Kelvin and offer him some assistance? :rolleyes:

[barefoot]

Oh and by the way when you have to begin your argument with an insult it shows how strong the ground you stand on is.

[gloco]

Yes I see now, it was a Republican conspiracy. And they checked to see their voting party to if it was

Jon M. Doe (R) can vote
Jon Doe (D) cant vote.

Names that we're similar were denied to vote if one of the names had a criminal past. What part can't you grasp? Politics is a dirty business and the Republicans wanted in worse than the Democrats did in 2000.

[gloco]

Oh and by the way when you have to begin your argument with an insult it shows how strong the ground you stand on is.

Ya might want to read the post before this one putz. I'm standing on solid ground and i think you and your cronies are in quicksand.

[cyberhound]

Here you go:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30

Name mentioned in the first paragraph and i'll copy and paste it here:

Kelvin King

I googled it exactly like this:

florida voters +2000 elections +denied to vote

Duh.

So, are you going to contact Kelvin and offer him some assistance? :rolleyes:
Very good. You are the first person in almost four years to provide a name. Now, does this prove that Gore won Florida?

[barefoot]

Names that we're similar were denied to vote if one of the names had a criminal past. What part can't you grasp? Politics is a dirty business and the Republicans wanted in worse than the Democrats did in 2000.
I agree politics is a dirty game, and I am not saying shady things might not happen. I dont know what the technology is that they use to screen names. The voting system they use is dated so I am sure the rest of their system is too. How would you be able to make sure you arent letting felons vote? I am sure the system needs to be upgraded but I am not sure about a full blown conspiracy.

[barefoot]

Ya might want to read the post before this one putz. I'm standing on solid ground and i think you and your cronies are in quicksand.
Actually the Democrats were the ones in quicksand.(I will not stoop to your level to add an insulting term twords you )

[gloco]

Very good. You are the first person in almost four years to provide a name. Now, does this prove that Gore won Florida?

No. What it does prove is that certain groups of people looking for the welfare of the Republican party scammed at least one individual out of voting. I imagine there's many like this guy who got screwed. Come on Loftin, you should know better. My blood boils when i heard about this crap going on down there, it reeks of fraud.

If you are an avid cable/satellite viewer, the program i mentioned runs every so often, i imagine it'll be back on with the oncoming elections, try to catch it. I think it's titled Election 2000, or something along those lines. The documentary provides tons of information and proof about how many of these voters we're removed from the rolls based on loose parameters.

Would you like it if this happened to you if you were a minority? I doubt it.

[gloco]

I agree politics is a dirty game, and I am not saying shady things might not happen. I dont know what the technology is that they use to screen names. The voting system they use is dated so I am sure the rest of their system is too. How would you be able to make sure you arent letting felons vote? I am sure the system needs to be upgraded but I am not sure about a full blown conspiracy.

The system that was used was provided with loose parameters by the republican leaders of the State. They choose the parameters that i mentioned above about similar names, even if the SS#'s were totally different. This has to do with the voter rolls not the actual process of going into a booth to vote.

[loogs91]

you said they didn't just go by name, but by birthdate as well. i highly doubt there are THAT many people who have the same name as a criminal AND were born on the same day as that criminal. So something is fishy about your story.

[cyberhound]

No. What it does prove is that certain groups of people looking for the welfare of the Republican party scammed at least one individual out of voting. I imagine there's many like this guy who got screwed. Come on Loftin, you should know better. My blood boils when i heard about this crap going on down there, it reeks of fraud.

If you are an avid cable/satellite viewer, the program i mentioned runs every so often, i imagine it'll be back on with the oncoming elections, try to catch it. I think it's titled Election 2000, or something along those lines. The documentary provides tons of information and proof about how many of these voters we're removed from the rolls based on loose parameters.

Would you like it if this happened to you if you were a minority? I doubt it.
The purge list was created a comapny called Database Technologies. And there were thousands of names on the list. Some say there could have been four million. Database Techonolgies was initially hired to create the list by Ethel Baxter a Democrat when she held office. The lists were later given by Kathleen Harris to the election supervisors in each county. Many of whom are Democrats. So, no I don't think this was simply people looking out for the welfare of the Republican party. It seems to be ineptude and reliance on faulty technology by many in Florida's election system. Not unlike what happened on election day in Florida in 2000. I have no doubt, though until now I haven't seen a name, of disenfranchisement among voters in Florida. It happens everywhere. But I don't find any sort of conspiracy or any evidence that it would have changed the outcome of that election.

[Davenumber40]

(In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.)

Reason #746 why I vote republican.


anyone else notice how fox news cut off kerry talking after like 2 minutes and went back to the RNC

Maybe Kerry should not schedule a rally less than an hour after the sitting president is accepting his nomination at the convention. That was completely tactless. Just like saying Dick Cheney called him unfit for command and challanged his patriotism.

[FriedSquad]

Has anyone learned yet? Republicans are always sitting on a pulpet, high and mightry, secrure in their belief that they are right and need not prove that to anyone. Never once do they provide any factual information to back up their arguments but they always seem to demand it in return. It's the classic "I'm right until proven otherwise"

[Davenumber40]

Has anyone learned yet? Republicans are always sitting on a pulpet, high and mightry, secrure in their belief that they are right and need not prove that to anyone. Never once do they provide any factual information to back up their arguments but they always seem to demand it in return. It's the classic "I'm right until proven otherwise"

Any examples? That's a fairly blanket statement.

[cyberhound]

Has anyone learned yet? Republicans are always sitting on a pulpet, high and mightry, secrure in their belief that they are right and need not prove that to anyone. Never once do they provide any factual information to back up their arguments but they always seem to demand it in return. It's the classic "I'm right until proven otherwise"
Do you have evidence to support this reasoning?

[gloco]

you said they didn't just go by name, but by birthdate as well. i highly doubt there are THAT many people who have the same name as a criminal AND were born on the same day as that criminal. So something is fishy about your story.

Loose parameters

In other words, many of the parameters used to purge these names went on loose matches (same month, same year).

[seekupig]

In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush's win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state--Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both protegees of Governor Jeb Bush--ordered 57,700 "exfelons," who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.)
Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida's electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1111/is_1822_304/ai_83553508

There are plenty more articles about the incident. Just Google it.

on the flipped side... i also remember all of the major news stations declaring Gore the winner of Florida, failing to realize that a large part of the panhandle (which is largely Republican) was in a different time zone and still had one hour left to vote. How many people would wait in line to vote for an election that had been declared over?

[SMN43]

No. What it does prove is that certain groups of people looking for the welfare of the Republican party scammed at least one individual out of voting. I imagine there's many like this guy who got screwed. Come on Loftin, you should know better. My blood boils when i heard about this crap going on down there, it reeks of fraud.

If you are an avid cable/satellite viewer, the program i mentioned runs every so often, i imagine it'll be back on with the oncoming elections, try to catch it. I think it's titled Election 2000, or something along those lines. The documentary provides tons of information and proof about how many of these voters we're removed from the rolls based on loose parameters.

Would you like it if this happened to you if you were a minority? I doubt it.
If you are going to make this argument and blame the Republicans for what is going on in this situation than you should also address Democrats "buying" the votes of bums in the street with cigarettes and liquor. That has been an issue throughout major cities forever.

[stimmerman]

My oringinal intent when posting that article was to respond to Dancing Ants' request for some proof that it actually happened, which is hard to deny. I don't think it is justified by claiming that Democrats pay bums to vote by buying them liquor and cigarettes, even if that is true.

While I don't think the disenfranchisement was a "Republican" conspiracy, I do think those involved knew the impact of what they were doing.
The purge list was created a comapny called Database Technologies. And there were thousands of names on the list. Some say there could have been four million. Database Techonolgies was initially hired to create the list by Ethel Baxter a Democrat when she held office. The lists were later given by Kathleen Harris to the election supervisors in each county. Many of whom are Democrats. So, no I don't think this was simply people looking out for the welfare of the Republican party.
Loftin is right about the company that provided the lists and I'm sure there were democrats involved in the handling of the list. Where I see the problem is here. Kathleen Harris was in charge of the list and gathering it. When DBT, the company gathering the names for the list, suggested they do a cross-check of the list to verify the names were all correct and all were actually felons, as is most likely standard practice in their business, Harris wrote them back that they "Don't need" to do that. Why wouldn't she, in a state the might hold the election in the balance and who's governor is the brother of the presidential candidate not want to verify her information for accuracy? There could be many answers to this question, I have formed my own opinion about it.

[gloco]

If you are going to make this argument and blame the Republicans for what is going on in this situation than you should also address Democrats "buying" the votes of bums in the street with cigarettes and liquor. That has been an issue throughout major cities forever.

If that's the case, they are bastards too. It just seems that our national elections are run as if we were all in Junior High School.

[jimibadfish]

If you freakin' morons actually believe that the republicans of Florida took away thousands of voters' rights, then ya'll are smoking the same crack as Michael Moore. So please, continue to try to advert the attention away from the issues that matter while Bush runs away with the presidency. He won the last election and Al Gore was a much stronger candidate the John Kerry.

[ambysshrink]

So please, continue to try to advert the attention away from the issues that matter...
You know what. You just made a blanket statement that contains no truth. Please, name me one applicable issue that Kerry has not taken a stand on.

All this bullshit about "avoiding the issues", yet whenever I ask for an issue he's avoided, nobody comes up with one.

Until someone provides me with one, I"m considering your argument invalid, ignorant and unfounded.

[Spicy McHaggis]

The reason is because there is not one side of any issue that Sen. Kerry hasn't taken!

[gloco]

The reason is because there is not one side of any issue that Sen. Kerry hasn't taken!

Therefore he is the greatest politician of all time. :p

[nubby]

Very good. You are the first person in almost four years to provide a name. Now, does this prove that Gore won Florida?
What it proves is that even struck with proof you want to deny the accusation that Florida's electoral votes were stolen.

[cyberhound]

What it proves is that even struck with proof you want to deny the accusation that Florida's electoral votes were stolen.
Lame, just lame. And you can prove they were stolen how? And don't use that one example as Florida being stolen. We can dredge up the whole election down there if you wish and find many things that were done wrong that benefitted both sides.

[nubby]

Lame, just lame. And you can prove they were stolen how? And don't use that one example as Florida being stolen. We can dredge up the whole election down there if you wish and find many things that were done wrong that benefitted both sides.
Ok name the things that were shady that helped Gore! It was plain as day that with the combination of elderly hanging-chad votes and the supposed xcon votes all being uncounted lead to Bush being ahead by less than a thousand votes. The fact that those votes weren't recounted because of the state supreme court is simply amazing. To be honest Cyber I don't want to even get into it because this has been argued a bajillion times and pretty much every time I've read the arguments, Gore should have won the election based on the given information. Arguing otherwise is just wasted space.

[cyberhound]

Ok name the things that were shady that helped Gore! It was plain as day that with the combination of elderly hanging-chad votes and the supposed xcon votes all being uncounted lead to Bush being ahead by less than a thousand votes. The fact that those votes weren't recounted because of the state supreme court is simply amazing. To be honest Cyber I don't want to even get into it because this has been argued a bajillion times and pretty much every time I've read the arguments, Gore should have won the election based on the given information. Arguing otherwise is just wasted space.
Then fucking shut up about it.

[nubby]

Then fucking shut up about it.
No but you can certainly shut up.

[cyberhound]

No but you can certainly shut up.For someone who doesn't want to get into the issue you sure keep right on with it. Make up your mind.

[nubby]

Nah I think I'll flip flop.

[ambysshrink]

The reason is because there is not one side of any issue that Sen. Kerry hasn't taken!
Hahahhaahaha what a clever argument.

Will you give that up already? It's just not true. Flip-flop is such a broad phrase now, that all it means is "taking new evidence into consideration." Times change, so do politics, so do policies. THat's just how it works.

Bush in fact changed his entire mindset regarding foreign policy while he was in office! In waht way does Kerry flip flop more than Bush?

[nubby]

He doesn't thats why the whole fuckin argument is bogus.

[ambysshrink]

I know, i'm just waiting for him to come out and say...

"I'm a fucking pawn."

[gloco]

It happens everywhere.

So does that mean it's ok? I'm not surprised by your lack of enthusiam that something corrupt happened in 2000 that left a bad taste in many people's mouths (namely minorities).

The attitude of "it happens everywhere" is a slap in the face and to be quyite blunt, if you're not going to be a part of the solution, then you are a part of the problem.

[cyberhound]

So does that mean it's ok? I'm not surprised by your lack of enthusiam that something corrupt happened in 2000 that left a bad taste in many people's mouths (namely minorities).

The attitude of "it happens everywhere" is a slap in the face and to be quyite blunt, if you're not going to be a part of the solution, then you are a part of the problem.
And just where did I say it was ok. You built an argument out of nothing.

[gloco]

And just where did I say it was ok. You built an argument out of nothing.

READ: "It happens everywhere." In regards to the disenfranchised voters.

That's a quote from YOU. I responded directly to this part...are you saying i took it out of context?

[cyberhound]

READ: "It happens everywhere." In regards to the disenfranchised voters.

That's a quote from YOU. I responded directly to this part...are you saying i took it out of context?
Duh.